[ppml] Why should ARIN have to be dictated first by ICANN?

[Joe Baptista]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, A. M. Salim wrote:

> There is no "service value" that you can in any way, shape or form attach
> directly to the IP address as a chargeable entity by itself.  All the
> "service value" comes from routing and network infrastructure (the network
> cabling, hardware and software we have to pay for), administrative
> infrastructure (the employees, the building leases, the utility bills,
> federal and state taxes not any hair-brained ICANN nd ARIN taxes that we
> have to pay for) etc.

IP has a great deal of value.  In some cases political.  Look at the
existing USG root infrastructure.  Because of the deployment of DNS
programs like BIND which relied on the USG root hint file we now have 13
root who are the real in house controllers of the root.  Thats 70% of
internet control.

IP infrstructure is critical to the deployment of systems.  In an
organization it is beneficial to build system infrastructure on fixed IP
and not be subject to renumbering - which is i'm sure you will agree is an
expense best not visited by the IT department.

> Yes ARIN sould charge some sort of fees to support their infrastructure,
> and the $2500 per year for a /19 is quite reasonable, and some would argue
> it is too high.  Byt Jim's suggestions and comparisons are truly beyond
> reason.

$2,500 for a /19 is nuts.  Even the /8 fees are nuts.  At best all ARIN
does is reverse arpa.  And thats worth only $6.00 per year per allocation.

Regards
joe baptista