[arin-discuss] tweak to proposed fee schedule

[John Curran]

On Apr 11, 2013, at 8:15 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> Are you suggesting that they should not be allowed to request 
>> a /36 IPv6 block at all, contrary to present policy?  If so, 
>> this should raised on the Public Policy mailing list (ppml) 
>> for further discussion.
> 
> If you take out the fee incentive to do so, I think the policy issue is largely moot.

Owen - 
   
  It is very important to have a fee schedule which is "complete";
  i.e. covers the entire range of possible address holdings.  It is
  also good for the Board to be clear regarding the corresponding
  fee expectations for all ranges. The fee schedule should not be
  constraining the community discussion in any manner, and it would
  not be appropriate for the ARIN Board to use the fee schedule to 
  preempt discussion of policy, including the proposed change in 
  Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3 "Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs" 
  <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2013_3.html>.

  The community should have the opportunity to consider the various
  of aspects of any proposed policy, including any fairness or technical 
  concerns, and come to a conclusion regarding support or lack thereof.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN