[arin-discuss] SPAM-WARN:Re: ARIN Fee discussion

[Michael Thomas - Mathbox]

Owen,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 3:27 PM
> To: Michael Thomas - Mathbox
> Cc: 'Howard, W. Lee'; 'Internet Partners, Inc. Tech Support'; 
> arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] SPAM-WARN:Re: ARIN Fee discussion
> 
> >
> > The thing that all of your arguments ignore is that there is no  
> > relationship
> > between the fees imposed and the community resources consumed. The  
> > resources
> > belong to the community, not 2.8% of the community.
> 
> The thing this argument ignores is that the fees are NOT for the  
> resources.
> They are for the administration of the resources.

Well, that is precisely my argument.

> 
> Just like when a telephone company goes to NANPA for a new prefix,  
> they do
> not buy the prefix.  They pay for the administration to delegate the  
> prefix to them.
> If you want proof that they didn't buy the prefix, how about 
> the fact  
> that any
> customer they delegate a number to from that prefix can take said  
> number to
> another phone company free of charge and without penalty.

Irrelevent. Joe Average cannot get an IP address from Comcast and carry it
to Verizon. OTOH, the telephone company does not have the equivilent of RFC
1918, unless you want to count area code 700, which is not exactly the same
thing.

Further, I in no way suggest that paying based on resources consumed implies
ownership of the resource. 

> 
> Owen

Just because NANPA does that, that doesn't mean it is the correct thing to
do for IP addresses. Also, isn't the whole telephone industry regulated?
Yep, sure is.

NANPA funding
The NANPA function is performed under an FCC contract on a
fixed-price basis.
Costs associated with the administration of shared numbering
resources are allocated to participating countries based on population,
and then further adjusted based on NANPA services used by
each country. Participants pay only their share of the costs of the
NANPA services they require. Regulatory authorities in each participating
country determine how to recover these costs. In the U.S.,
which pays most of the cost, NANPA is funded by the telecommunications
industry under an arrangement specified in FCC rules.

Because this industry is not regulated, your argument does not apply. If it
was regulated, everyone would pay the same fee for the same amount of
resources, or they wouldn't pay anything at all.

I cannot think of any other industry, where the more resources you consume,
the more resources you get for free.

Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-683-6718
1-877-MATHBOX (Toll Free)