[ppml] ARIN IP conservation and FREE IP Addresses

[Jason Schiller]

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007, William Herrin wrote:

> Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 22:00:04 -0400
> From: William Herrin <arin-contact at dirtside.com>
> To: Jason Schiller <jason.schiller at verizonbusiness.com>
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] ARIN IP conservation and FREE IP Addresses
> 
> On 10/6/07, Jason Schiller <schiller at uu.net> wrote:
> > I would just like to point out that not all ISPs charge for IP
> > addresses.  If ARIN added a per IP address charge, then I suspect Verizon
> > Business would be temped to charge their customers for IP addresses.
> 
> Jason,
> 
> For the record, Verizon does charge their SOHO and small business
> customers for IP addresses. I have 5 addresses on my business FiOS
> account and pay $5 per month for each.

Just for the record I was referring to Verizon Business... AS701
(UUNET) which does not charge for IP addresses (not for business customer, 
not for SOHO, not for residential customers, not for DSL customers or
DS-0 customers, not for any customers). 

When you refer to Verizon you are likely talking about AS19262 Verizon
Internet Services (VIS).  They are completely seperate networks run by
completely seperate Business unit, with a completely seperate set of
management, with a whole host of legacy policies.

In other words Verizon Business does not equal Verizon.

> 
> Once you're in a high enough business tier they do stop charging. The
> breakpoint comes around the time the revenues from your single account
> are sufficient to pay the entire ARIN bill.
> 
> And by the way, why exactly can't I transfer the /26 Verizon Business
> assigned to me as a customer of its Ashburn VA data center to the
> Verizon Business 50-meg line I ordered from you in Vienna VA? You guys
> really got on my s*** list over that particular stunt.

This is not a stunt.  The data centers are managed as a separate network
with a separate AS, and due to route aggregation policies, your data
center /26 would not route correctly.  People sometimes have to renumber
when they change networks... and yes that is painful.

Just so you know the same would happen for longer than /24s from one
continent being moved to another (Say UUNET North America and UUNET
Asia-Pacific)

> 
> 
> > Charging for IP addresses gives the impression that the addresses are
> > property.  As a result, it leads to the conclusion that the only
> > justification required to get said addresses is if one pays enough money.
> 
> Then the "Local Internet Registries" shouldn't be doing that, should they?

Yes, I agree it would be great if the "Local Internet Registries" did not
charge for IP addresses (with them not being property and all), and that
is why Verizon Business (UUNET) doesn't.  I can't speak for any other LIRs
(including Verizon Internet Services (VIS).


__Jason
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> 
> 
> -- 
> William D. Herrin                  herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr.                        Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>