[arin-discuss] ARIN registration fee data (was: Status of realigning the IPv6 fee structure ?)

[mark]

John,

 I know it is public info but what is AIRN,s yearly cost of operation?  And  
how much money did AIRN take in last year. This would be usefull info  
reguarding this discussion.

           Mark Bayliss
        Visual Link Internet 
Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-----Original message-----
From: Dmitry Kohmanyuk <dk at intuix.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: arin-discuss List <arin-discuss at arin.net>, John Curran  
<jcurran at arin.net>
Sent: Thu, Mar 15, 2012 22:29:15 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] ARIN registration fee data (was: Status of	 
realigning the IPv6 fee structure?)


On Mar 15, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:

> Looks to me like the current scope of the problem is limited to $406,000
> in reduced revenue with an overall scope limit of $1,229,000+growth
> total scope.
> 
> By that, I mean that if we simply declared /32 to be x-small and set the
> fee at $1,250, the loss to ARIN in revenue from current holders 
> would be limited to the 406 currently paying based on their IPv6
> small status (or less) and that there is no possibility of it applying
> to more than the 1,229 x-small IPv4 members (+growth) even if
> everyone were to take up IPv6 resources tomorrow.
> 
> Would that be an accurate conclusion from the data, John?
> 
> If that is the total impact, then, I would actually support declaring /32
> to be extra-small and would support subsequent policy to eliminate
> the /36 as moot.

Well, we have to have X-small and Small categories, right?

And somebody suggested to put IPv6 category limits on nibble boundaries  
(divisible by 4.)

So, I see those action points:

1) consider whether ARIN can afford to lose $400K right now (with potential  
to lose more in 2013.)
2) if 1 is yes - move on adjusting fee for Small category now to march  
X-small IPv4 (see impact above.)
3) optional - introduce X-Small IPv6 at /36 and set its fees to match  
X-small IPv4, adjusting Small IPv6 up - from Jan1,2013.
4) optional - revise other IPv6 boundaries - probably does not really have  
big fiscal impact, and deserves separate discussion.

Now, I guess we can all benefit from John Curran opinion on point 1, at  
least.

-- dk@
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20120315/15758f88/attachment.html>