[ppml] New ARIN Sub-region Policy Proposal (Rural-America)

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Thu Oct 9 12:50:11 EDT 2003


In a message written on Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 12:27:22PM -0400, Bill Van Emburg wrote:
> not true.  You must look no further than the fee structure to see this.
>  Charging large ISPs more money to be ARIN members is a policy with no
> technical basis.

I thought the fee structure represented technical concerns, namely.

1) ISP's generate lots of SWIP requests and the like that need to
   be processed, which takes mail servers, programmers, and people
   to watch over it.  End users do not generate (the same level
   of?) requests.

2) The larger the block assigned the more ARIN's top level in-addr.arpa.
   nameservers will be hit, thus the larger the infrastructure cost.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20031009/63285182/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list