[arin-discuss] IPv6 as justification for IPv4?

[John Curran]

On Apr 15, 2013, at 1:51 PM, rlc at usfamily.net wrote:

> You ARE new to this.  If you had been around longer, you would have realized
> that large players run the show at ARIN.  Otherwise, the fees would have been
> proportional to the size of the netblocks on IPv4, at least since the time that
> people started to come to grips with the mathematics of IPv4.
> 
> Instead, the big guys mumble that ARIN has administrative economies of scale
> with them.  So what?  If ARIN REALLY wanted to encourage large-scale adoption
> of IPv6, they would have squeezed the big guys.  Never happened, never will.


Note that the Revised Fee schedule actually adds a new category of XX-Large 
which raises fees for the largest ISPs significantly; this would not be an
expected outcome if "large players run the show at ARIN".

Also, ARIN's membership is mostly composed of small and medium ISPs, thus 
putting the election of the ARIN Board of Trustees far more control of the 
small ISP community than largest ISPs - 


   Size        2011 
   Category    Count

   X-Small      948
   Small      2,240
   Medium       630
   Large        106
   X–Large       73

It is true that some ISPs participate more heavily in ARIN policy and 
governance discussions than do others, but that is a choice up to each
member of the community.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN