[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-8: Transfer Policy Clarifications

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed Mar 7 19:20:54 EST 2007

On Mar 7, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Daniel Senie wrote:

> At 06:37 PM 3/7/2007, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> 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
>> one holds?
> 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?
Actually, I think the ARIN fee structure does a reasonably good job
of translating the registration effort/cost into fees...

As an end-user organization with a relatively static set of data, my
fees are only $100/year, regardless of my resources because I am
unlikely to change things often, and, when I do, it's usually just
an address or POC.

OTOH, as an ISP, the larger the pool of addresses I have, the more
often it is likely I will change assignments, add/remove/update
data on reassignments, etc.
>> 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?
I've worked with a number of smaller ISPs, and, I have not seen the
current fee structure pose a hardship for any of them. You're <=$2,250
per year until you need more than a /19.  and <=$4,500 until you
are all the way up through /16.

In fact, having looked at the RIPE and APNIC fee structures, I would
say that for most small ISP scenarios I have experienced, ARIN is
less expensive from 0 to ASN+IP than RIPE or APNIC.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list