[ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9

Tue Oct 1 17:49:13 EDT 2002

Mury,
BTW - No offense taken.

I think that everyone should be "raked over the coals every time they ask
for space". I do not advocate less criteria.. as you mention. I even support
more scrutiny.

The little guy is getting SCREWED right now by big business. The little guy
is the small and medium sized businesses that have a legitimate need for /24
address space.
We do NOT have equal access to IP space like an ISP or large company does.
An ISP sometimes pays an initial registration fee for IP number then a
nominal fee per year... if at all for. Some ISP do not pay anything for IP's
they have. For that matter some users like me pay or paid nothing to get the
/24 and CONTINUE to pay nothing.
So... they are charging customers for a product (IP address) they have or
get for free. NO FAIR!

I'm fine with charging more for internet connectivity. I'm fine with paying
for a couple IP numbers. I'm not ok with paying for something they get for
essentially free. Take the fee that many ISP want to charge per IP. $5 per
month times 255 = $1,275 per month x 12 months = $15,300 per year! Thats a
cost that any company that has a legitamate usage for a /20 space does not
have to pay. Yes they pay registration (much much less then this amount)
then the nominal $30 per year maintenance fee. Which is fair?

This issue and policy proposal is about equal access to IP space for one of
the most important users of the Internet. Small and medium size businesses
that have a legitimate need for /24 address space.

Equal access does involve $$.
IP space is not owned and is not a commodity that can be bought and sold. It
is to be used by companies that have a legitimate usage for them. ARIN is
the organization that makes sure it's being used properly.  There is no
reason they cannot do the same for /24 space.

Small businesses are what drives the North American economy... it is one of
the most important segments of the Internet community. This is what ARIN has
been put in place for... to support the Internet community at large.

I'm putting a stake in the ground and trying to look out for the little guy
who is getting screwed right now.
Vote to PASS this policy proposal,

Beran

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mury" <mury at goldengate.net>
To: "Beran" <beran at beranpeter.com>
Cc: "Alec H. Peterson" <ahp at hilander.com>; "Jim Fleming"
<JimFleming at ameritech.net>; <ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:44 PM
Subject: RE: [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9

>
> Beran,
>
> I have to admit I pretty much disagree with everything you just said.
>
> 1) As Alec said, ARIN should not base policies on the billing policies of
>    ISPs.
> a) ISPs aren't exactly making money hand over foot.
> b) There is still tremendous competition, so if an ISPs billing
>    policies are out of wack they simply won't get customers.
> c) It doesn't seem to me that you have thought through how ISPs
>    need to market and sell products.  The typical user does not
>    want to have weird mysterious bandwidth charges showing up.
>    They won't buy what the don't understand.  Why do you think
>    no one sells DSL or cable that way?
> d) If an ISPs needs to make a certain amount of money to pay the
>    bills, they will find a way to make up that money elsewhere
>    if that is where they were deriving it from.  And whether
>    you want to admit it or not, the fact remains that users with
>    static/routed IPs use more resources than other customers.
>
> ISPs are hoarding IP space???!!!  Good lord!  ARIN rakes me over the coals
> every time I ask for space.  I have to fit .252 networks in all over my
> network to properly utilize all my space until ARIN graciously gives me
> the IPs I need.  I've lost customers because I haven't had enough IPs to
> help a customer.  I don't have one single IP wasted out of our block.  I
> have an extremely difficult time believing that other ISPs are being
> treated with less scrutiny, since I don't remember personally pissing
> anyone off at ARIN to make them treat me different.  Sounds like you have
> had some poor experiences with some ISPs... but that is just speculation.
>
> > ARIN IS doing a good job. Great people, great service, and responsive.
> > ISP's on average have not been any of these.
>
> Hmmm, maybe my suspicions have been confirmed.
>
> Whether or not I think it's a good thing to hand out smaller blocks and
> with less criteria, I know that your reasons strike me as being completely
> off base.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mury
>
> PS, sometimes emails come across the wrong way.  I'm not trying to insult
> you or start some sort of war, but after re-reading it I know it could be
> interpreted that way.  I simply think you are off-base.
>
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Beran wrote:
>
> > Alec.
> > I quote from the ARIN web site:
> > "As a nonprofit organization with a bottom-up, community-based
structure,
> > our focus is completely on serving our members and the Internet
community at
> > large."
> >
> > Serving the members that operate ARIN is important but their goal and
ARIN's
> > goal is to serve the Internet community at large.
> > Your "technical and operational issues" are important but do NOT include
> > other aspects of serving the Internet community at large.
> >
> > Equal access to ip space is VERY important to the Internet community at
> > large. This should be a TOP priority!
> >
> > It is clear now that we have had a number of years of operation in the
> > current format to understand that IP space is still being improperly
> > utilized/horded/charged for etc.
> > Why not allow /24 address space allocations?
> > I see and have heard NO good reasons not to allow it. The same process
and
> > the same requirements for a /20 address space works well now so why not
for
> > /24.
> > ARIN IS doing a good job. Great people, great service, and responsive.
> > ISP's on average have not been any of these. And to charge EVERY month
for
> > EVERY ip used which was essentially free to obtain for anyone to justify
a
> > couple years ago is terrible.
> > Usage can be metered and is metered so the usage argument per IP is not
a
> > good one.
> >
> > Beran
> >
> > Beran Peter
> > Beran at BeranPeter.com <mailto:Beran at BeranPeter.com>
> > 617-803-3658
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of Alec
> > H. Peterson
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:59 PM
> > To: Jim Fleming; ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: Re: [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9
> >
> >
> > --On Tuesday, October 1, 2002 12:53 -0500 Jim Fleming
> > <JimFleming at ameritech.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Can you convert all that to dollars and sense ?
> > >
> > > As an example, if you determine that your needs are to run a homeless
> > > shelter, what will that cost ? and why should ISPs be paying for that
?
> > >
> > > Also, what are the needs of all of the Directors and their "staffers"
as
> > > they are called in D.C. ? Do you think the ICANN and ARIN Directors
> > > should each maintain an office with staff ? Would a $2,000,000 dollar
per
> > > year budget per Director handle all their **needs** ?
> > >
> > > You seem to want to start with **needs** and then work to costs.
> > > Can you do that ?
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > I will be the first to admit that I do not have a head for pricing as
far
> > as what any entity (and ISP, ARIN or anything else) needs to charge to
make
> > ends meet.  I believe that the policy discussions should focus on the
> > technical and operational issues.  I see no need why money needs to be a
> > part of that discussion, it can happen separately once the policy itself
> > has been decided.
> >
> > ALec
> >
> > --
> > Alec H. Peterson -- ahp at hilander.com
> > Chief Technology Officer
> > Catbird Networks, http://www.catbird.com
> >
>
>