<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Hi John,<br>
<br>
Yeah, that's basically what I suggested. To waive the setup fee for
ASN allocation, should a LIR have a RSP plan active.<br>
Could be a little bit lowered for individuals and
educational/research networks, but that may open a little door for
abusive allocations (eg. GRE-tunneled IXP for "research").<br>
<br>
I'm very glad you actually considered my feedback, would be amazing
if will be implemented as well.<br>
<br>
Thank you,<br>
Andrei.<br>
<br>
On 2023-07-11 2:43 PM, John Curran wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BDA799DC-BC96-4B55-85B1-8081F93CC8FD@arin.net">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Jul 11, 2023, at 7:33 AM, Andrei via ARIN-consult
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:arin-consult@arin.net"><arin-consult@arin.net></a> wrote:</div>
...<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal;
font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400;
letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent:
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline
!important;">If, for example, on X-Small plan you pay
$1,000 per year for holding a maximum of /20 IPv4 and /32
IPv6, why don't you add a 3rd resource for ASN? Each RSP
plan to include a max. number of ASNs without any fee and
if exceeded, to choose either to upgrade to the next slab
or to start paying for setup fee if the amount of included
ASNs is exceeded?</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<div>Andrei - </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is essentially the approach that is being proposed in
the ASN Fee Harmonization proposal – ARIN proposes adding a
third column to the RSP plan fee schedule with each size
category covering a certain number of ASNs. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As per the original consultation – </div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding:
0px;">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">In 2022, ARIN transitioned end user
customers to the RSP fee schedule based on total IPv4 and
IPv6 resources held, to ensure costs were distributed in
an equitable manner by eliminating the fee differentiation
between ISP and end user organizations. Now ARIN is
seeking community feedback on a plan to complete the fee
harmonization process by transitioning ASNs to the RSP Fee
Schedule.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Proposed Fee Harmonization (all fees
in USD)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">- Organizations holding 1-3 ASNs
will be categorized as 3X-Small, with an annual fee of
$250.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">- Organizations holding 4-15 ASNs
will be categorized as 2X-Small, with an annual fee of
$500.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">- Organizations holding 16-63 ASNs
will be categorized as X-Small, with an annual fee of
$1000.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">- Organizations holding 64-255 ASNs
will be categorized as Small, with an annual fee of $2000.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">- Organizations holding 256+ ASNs
will be categorized as Medium, with an annual fee of
$4000.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If I understand correctly, I believe the refinement that you
are proposing is that once an organization has a Registration
Services Plan, they not pay setup fees for additional ASNs. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That is an excellent suggestion well worth considering (and
would be similar to how requests for IPv4/IPv6 resources are
handled under an RSP place today...)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for the feedback!</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>American Registry for Internet Numbers</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>