[ppml] Why should ARIN have to be dictated first by ICANN?
baptista at dot-god.com
Fri Oct 4 10:19:31 EDT 2002
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, A. M. Salim wrote:
> As a tiny ISP (we have a /22 from our upstream), at YOUR recoking, we
> would now need to start paying ARIN $10,240 per year and ICANN another
> $10,240 per year. Please, Jim, please try and read your own posts one of
> these days!
Well - right now they want $2,500 per year for a /24 - /19.
I think it's nuts myself. Just another conrad mutilevel marketing
> Or are you suggesting that each ISP, rolling in wealth that they are,
> should quietly hand over one sixth of their annual income to ICANN and
> ARIN? Come on guy !!!
> Plus these additional "minor" issues:
> a) Where did you get this figure of $10 to $15 per month you keep
> mentioning? This is an astronomical price to charge and I do not know of
> any ISP's that charge this amount. Our total web hosting package costs
> $19/mo (less in many cases) and of that, $15 is for the IP address you
> say??!! Gimme a break guy! Most ISP's charge diddly squat for IP's they
> provide to their downstreams , and I don't see any earthly reason for that
> to change. Yes I know you might be referring to "end users" but it does
> not take much, once this silly argument is established, to start viewing
> any downstream ISP's as "end users" or more accurately, "revenue centers".
> b) So now we will have to open our books to ICANN and ARIN so they can
> audit us to determine what our one month's revenue is, then hand it over
> to them? And we would have to prove which part of our income is IP
> related and which is not? And what if we refuse to hand over our books to
> ICANN and ARIN? This is getting so ridiculous, gotta go.
> best regards
> Mike Salim.
More information about the ARIN-PPML