[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-8: Transfer Policy Clarifications
dts at senie.com
Wed Mar 7 18:56:21 EST 2007
At 06:37 PM 3/7/2007, Randy Bush wrote:
> >> ARIN DOES NOT LEASE RESOURCES. ARIN DOES NOT SELL RESOURCES.
> > Yes, I'd wager everyone on this list has been clear on that for
> > sometime.
>hmmm. then why are fees proportional to the amound of resources
And why are they different for ISPs vs end users for the same size
blocks? The reasoning I've heard is that ISPs are expected to be
doing more with SWIPs and thus generate expense, but is this really
reasonable or fair? As a member with a /22 and a handful of SWIPs
that rarely change and no expectation of adding or removing any
(after all, SWIPs for /32's aren't done), what expense structure am I
really incurring on ARIN?
>suggest looking at ripe fee model, now being considered in apnic,
>where resources are 'aged' for the purpose of fee calculation, on
>the assumptions that
> o fees are for service not rental of resource, and
> o service cost declines the longer you hold the resource
Indeed. I'd argue that the present fee structure at ARIN is
problematic for smaller companies, especially smaller ISPs (since
multihomed end users don't pay based on their address space size).
Perhaps a base fee and a fee per event that generates a drain on
resources (SWIP, support, etc.) would be more reasonable?
More information about the ARIN-PPML