[ppml] Small vs Large ISP Address Usage (was: Re: Policy Proposal 2007-6 - Abandoned)

[Edward Lewis]

At 10:41 -0500 5/31/07, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>So, basically, we have a situation where 73 members consume nearly 80% of
>ARIN's v4 space but pay under 16% of the fees.  This is another way of looking
>at the frequent observation (i.e. complaint) that Xtra Large ISPs pay <3.4c/IP
>whereas Xtra Small ISPs pay up to $5/IP -- a factor of over 100 price
>difference.

The fees are not payment for space.

The fees go to operate the registry, one primary value being that it 
maintains the unique relationships between a number resource and the 
operator making use of it.  The beneficiaries of this are not just 
the operators, it is whoever relies on know the relationships 
created.  That includes anyone doing a reverse map lookup in DNS, 
doing a lookup in WhoIs, etc.  The situation is not analogous to 
renting an apartment where the dweller pays and derives the benefit.

Another way to slice the statistics is to compare the % of Membership 
and % of Fees and say that is it large ISPs that (per head) are 
subsidizing the benefit for the smaller ISPs (per head).

>I assert that until ISPs are discouraged from consuming as many addresses
>as possible, which is definitely the case once one passes /14 and pays
>_nothing_ for additional addresses, any efforts at conservation are doomed.
>Additionally, until we can get those 73 ISPs to implement real conservation
>measures (or convert to v6), it is pointless for the rest of the members to
>do anything.

I don't believe conservation is a goal.  (The goal is fairness in 
distribution.)  Internet number resources are a fiction, we can make 
more of them when we need.  Perhaps we may want to wring out more 
from IPv4 to forestall inevitable need to transition to a protocol 
with an expanded address space - but why conserve?  There are already 
more humans than IPv4 addresses, IPv4 isn't big enough for the globe. 
While there is no reason to waste the space and we do want to make as 
good use of it as we can, conservation is not what I would call a 
goal.

>I encourage members to make their opinions on the above stats known to the
>Board and during any debates about changes to the fee structure.

That's why I bothered to reply to this.  I think the stats are immaterial.


-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Sarcasm doesn't scale.