[arin-discuss] ARIN Fee discussion

[Howard, W. Lee]

I am delighted to see a substantive fee discussion on ARIN-discuss!

Let me try to explain the current system, without implying that
it's the only system possible.

The concept supporting the current fee structure is that ARIN
should try to recover its costs.  The cost to ARIN for issuing
address space is not linear; while it takes more time to 
review an application for a /16 than a /22, it doesn't take
32 times as long, and the demand on servers and finance and
meetings and so forth is similarly larger-but-non-linear.  So
for simplicity's sake a few size categories were defined, 
with fees at levels that seemed about right for each size,
without breaking anyone.

When setting fees for IPv6, we (the Finance Committee 
recommended to the Board) chose to follow a well-known and
generally-supported fee structure.  Look at the recent updates 
at http://www.arin.net/billing/fee_schedule.html
Ignore waivers for the moment.  Current policies (see the
NRPM at http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html) essentially
allow the following kinds of allocations or assignments:
	* End-user assignment from upstream provider (null)
	* End-user assignment from ARIN (/48 = $1,250 + $100/yr)
	* LIR standard allocation from ARIN (/32 = $2,250/yr)
	* Larger LIR allocations from ARIN (/31 and larger)

There are some exceptions and corner cases, but those are
the general cases.  LIRs pay an annual renewal because they
generate more work on an ongoing basis.  End-users only pay
a maintenance fee because in general, they require little
additional support, only enough to make sure there's still
somebody there.

Earlier this year, the Finance Committee reviewed about
15 proposals for fee structures (and waivers).  We agreed 
that we needed to continue working on this, but we
recommended the IPv6 declining waiver beginning in January
so we'd have a well-understood structure and waiver in
place while work continued.

So, as I often do, I'm soliciting suggestions for ARIN's
fee structure.  I suggest the following voluntary 
constraints:

* Define "fair" in a way that's obvious to the other guy
* Define your goal.  Either:
	* Work toward ARIN's current budget, 
	* or suggest specific budget changes,
	* or suggest a different goal
	http://www.arin.net/about_us/corp_docs/budget.html
* Emphasize IPv6 over IPv4.  Current projections suggest 
that the initial fee for IPv4 allocations and assignments 
will be moot very soon.
* Don't use analogies.  I have not found them particularly 
enlightening in the past six months.
* Change the subject line if you're coming up with a new
suggestion.

These are only suggestions, and completely voluntary--you
can still post whatever you like on the topic.

Your Treasurer,

Lee Howard