<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Hi there,<br>
<br>
To be honest, I see the approach RIPE has on AS numbers a little bit
more sane than ARIN's.<br>
Not talking about huge organizations, with a great turnover, for
which a setup fee of $500 is not a big deal, but the regular user.
Startups, small businesses, individuals or even educational
networks. Those can't really afford to pay a $500 fee for ARIN AS
Number.<br>
The vast majority of them go to RIPE, complete a dummy justification
with a VM rented in EU zone and get an AS number for as low as
$20-$30 one-time.<br>
<br>
Why wouldn't ARIN do something to encourage small businesses also to
register an AS number in the correct RIR. As I saw many US ISPs do
not include RIPE as IRR and vice-versa.. EU ISPs don't include ARIN
as an IRR source when validating prefixes for ASN/AS-SET.<br>
Is there so much work to do, while issuing an AS number to an
ORG/End-User to justify $500 setup fee? Why can't it be somehow
included in the RSP plan?<br>
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?<br>
<br>
We're not a member for so long, only ~2 years. But I've seen only
price increase or new fees for tasks (OrgCreate for example) which
are kinda ridiculous, in my opinion at least.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Andrei.<br>
<br>
On 2023-07-11 8:27 AM, Ross Tajvar wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+FDdDR7eg_vAP=MOZ28f50b8_AhbWh05+2uyEtmC98nN_Xaag@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">
<div>Hi all,
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">While I do think there's merit to Steve's
point that ASN-only customers have chosen not to become
members, I have to say, I would care about this a lot more
(at all, really) if the fees were higher. For a business
doing anything real, $250/yr is negligible. Even $500 or
$1000 is not a big deal...keeping an LLC open costs a few
hundred dollars a year. Buying transit (in order to use the
ASN) costs a couple hundred dollars a MONTH.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I understand that there is administrative
overhead associated with maintaining a registry of internet
numbers, keeping whois services highly available, handling
support requests, etc. ARIN must recover these costs by
charging fees to its customers. I couldn't say what the
average cost per ASN is (maybe John has some estimate
there?), but $250/yr for up to 3 ASNs does not seem wildly
unreasonable to me.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I also think there is value in the added
simplicity achieved by adopting a unified fee structure.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">For these reasons, I take no issue with this
proposed change.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
Best regards,</div>
<div dir="auto">Ross<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jul 10, 2023,
11:48 PM Steve Noble <<a href="mailto:snoble@sonn.com"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">snoble@sonn.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><br>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Jul 10, 2023, at 3:02 PM, John Curran <<a
href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jcurran@arin.net</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Jul 10, 2023, at 2:28 PM, Steve
Noble <<a href="mailto:snoble@sonn.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">snoble@sonn.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div>...</div>
<div dir="auto">I have a lot of
questions:</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">1. The above
paragraph states that there are
approximately 6800 organizations
holding a single ASN and more
specifically 313 with multiple
ASNs, what is the actual number of
organizations with a single ASN
and no other resources? </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Steve – </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">The ~6800 are ASN-Only
holders (no IPv4 or IPv6 resources)
with a single ASN. The 313 are
ASN-Only holders (no IPv4 or IPv6
resources) who have multiple ASNs. </div>
<div dir="auto">
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John -</div>
<div>You did not answer the question, the 6800 is
approximate, ARIN must know the actual number.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">
<div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">2. How many single
ASN holding organizations are
members of this mailing list?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
Unknown. The arin-consult mailing list is
open to all interested parties who comply the
Mailing List AUP and ARIN Participants
Expected Standards of Behavior – these are not
correlated to ASN holders.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
This is concerning since 6800+ organizations would be
affected and may not know so since they have not been
members and would not be part of the members mailing
list, etc.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0
40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">4. The customer impact
is significantly unbalanced where
over 95% of the organizations fees
increase vs the 2021 changes (<a
href="https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/ARIN49/materials/426_feemembership.pdf"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/ARIN49/materials/426_feemembership.pdf</a> slide
7) where ~50% stayed the same. Why
is this not clearly stated in the
document?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
That’s not quite correct - ASN Only Holders
represent 30% of total customers [where total
customers are Service + General + ASN Only.]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(If one adds uncontracted legacy customers to
that total, ASN-Only holders represent only ~18%
of total customers.)</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
John, I am talking about the affected parties, the
~7113 ASN-Only holders, 95% of them will be affected
negatively. What percentage they are of the total
number of customers is moot as the document I point to
clearly states :</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"● Transitioned all customers with IPv4 or IPv6
number resources to the same
RSP (Registration Services Plan) Fee Schedule:”</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This does not cover ASN only holders. If ASN only
holders were included in the not affected list and
chart that would be incorrect as they were not
included in the list of customers this was positioned
as being.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">5. Of the impacted
organizations, how many pay for
membership separately?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>None, as paid membership was removed as
part of the 2022 fee schedule change. This
change (ASN Fee Harmonization proposal) in
fact provides Service Member status to all
ASN holders. </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
So accordingly, zero ASN only organizations applied to
be members, I don’t see how forcing them to pay more
for something that they never applied for is a valid
benefit.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">6. Of the impacted
organizations, how many have requested IPv4
resources? </blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
Indeterminate, as it is often possible to
request resources without supplying ASN
holding information and thus correlated. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
ARIN should know how many ASN only members requested
IP addresses at least on an org level. If the ASN
belongs to a different organization, that would not
apply here as we are talking about organizations that
only hold ASNs.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">7. What is the
overlap of single ASN holding
organizations paying for
membership and requesting IP space
(two items claimed in the benefit
section).</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
No one is paying for ARIN Membership since the
2022 fee schedule change </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(All organizations holding IP number
resources under agreement have had service
member status since Jan 2022, and can request
General Member status if they wish to
participate in voting & ARIN governance
discussions). </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>ASN-Only holders will now have Service
Member status as part of the ASN Fee
Harmonization proposal AND will be able to
request corresponding IPv4 and IPv6 space if
they choose with no change in fee category. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
But according to above you have provided information
that zero ASN only organizations that have done this
so far, so ARIN is forcing ~6800 organizations to pay
more for a benefit that they have not requested.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">8. For due
diligence, based on the data ARIN
has compiled, how many of those
single ASN organizations would
qualify for IPv4 resources and be
approved and have them allocated
within the billing period that
this change would happen? Does
ARIN have 6800 /24 IPv4 blocks
available to allocate to the
affected parties?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
They would all qualify for IPv4 or IPv6 if
they are running a network and using their ASN
to run BGP. It probably goes without saying
that there is more than enough IPv6 resources
for all ASN-only customers...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For IPv4 resources, many would end up on
the IPv4 waiting list today, but note that for
those who wish to run IPv6, there is enough
4.10 transition IPv4 space (~14.5k /24s are
available under 4.10 as of June 2023) to
theoretically issue 4.10 IPv4 transition
blocks to all of the ASN-Only holders.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
I think that is a false equivalence comparing
transition space to available space. For example I
applied for my ASN 23 years ago, IPv4 space was much
easier to get. Had you charged the same fee whether I
had space or not, I would have applied for space. </div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto"
style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">In summary, based on
the information provided so far, I
believe that raising prices for
6800+ organizations to slightly
lower the cost burden of 313 is
unfair and unreasonable. There has
been no data provided to show what
the cost of serving a single ASN
organization is other than your
aggregate groups showing that it
is <=$15.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>This change provides for recovering
costs more equitably for services to
across the ARIN customer base, with the
added benefit of making ASN-only customers
ARIN Service Members, thus providing them
with the opportunity to become General
Members and participate in ARIN governance
if they so choose.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John - How much does it cost to provide service
to an ASN only holder? What actual, tangible
benefit do they get with this change? The affected
organizations could have asked to be members or for
IP space the entire time. There is no upside to
this that has been documented and it’s certainly all
negative from my position.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="line-break:after-white-space">
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In addition to bringing all ARIN
customers into a unified, equitable fee
schedule, the ASN Fee harmonization will
facilitate ASN-only resource holders
obtaining IPv4 and/or IPv6 resources if they
choose to do so. </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And to this point they should be able to choose,
If an ASN only organizations wants resources or to
be a member, they can pay more. If they want to
stay how they are they can stay how they are.
Forcing ASN only organizations to foot the bill for
those who have or want more is not equitable.</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
ARIN-Consult<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed
to the ARIN Consult Mailing<br>
List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-consult@arin.net"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ARIN-consult@arin.net</a>).<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
<a
href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult</a>
Please contact the ARIN Member Services<br>
Help Desk at <a href="mailto:info@arin.net"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a>
if you experience any issues.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
ARIN-Consult
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing
List (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ARIN-consult@arin.net">ARIN-consult@arin.net</a>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult</a> Please contact the ARIN Member Services
Help Desk at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>