[arin-discuss] ARIN Fee discussion

[Howard, W. Lee]

Excellent comments, very helpful! 

> 1) Please avoid use of temporary fee changes where possible.  
> Such as a waiver that is set to expire in a year unless 
> renewed by the board, etc.
> The ISP business is a long-term planning game, and if I'm 
> planning a deployment I don't want to have to worry about a 
> waiver not being renewed.

Yes, we heard this comment, and that is why we set up the
planned waiver for the next several years.  It's also part
of the reason we have been reluctant to tinker with fees
in the past.

> 2) I disagree with the "fee per single IP" approach. 
> . . .
> 3) The top pricing tier for blocks in ARIN should not be 
> occupied by more than a dozen or so organizations. 

Should it be a bell curve distribution?  Half-bell?  Linear?
In other words, if there are about 3000 members, should the 
distribution be (for XXL/XL/L/M/S) 15/500/2000/500/15 or
15/100/250/600/2000 or 15/300/600/900/1200?

I'll mention that there's a new XXL size category in IPv6,
that doesn't exist in IPv4.

> 4) If doing this brings in so much extra money that ARIN is 
> rolling in cash it doesen't need then let's lower fees on ALL 
> tiers.  Note that I am not really comfortable with ARIN 
> running with lean cash reserves 

We have a reserve that would let us operate for well over a
year with no additional income.  We can build a reserve
enough to cover part of our expenses from the income.
 
> 5) I disagree with month to month billing.  
> 
> I think ARIN's staff should have the flexibility to work out 
> payment plans with organizations that suddenly find 
> themselves caught on a yearly bill 

> Ted


Thank you for making clear, well-considered suggestions.
I really appreciate you taking the time to write up your
perspective.

Lee