[ppml] ARIN IP conservation and FREE IP Addresses
arin-contact at dirtside.com
Sat Oct 6 15:23:36 EDT 2007
On 10/6/07, Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
> In a message written on Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 10:11:23AM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
> > The price structure is entirely inappropriate for a rapidly
> > diminishing asset like IPv4 free pool. Where conservation is desired,
> > large allocations per year should made to cost more per address than
> > small ones.
> Leaving aside the issue of is it good or not, I'm not sure ARIN as
> a non-profit is in a position to implement a "sin tax" on IP addresses
> to promote conservation.
The "Local Internet Registries" do. If you're a SOHO or hobbyist
customer its not unusual to pay anywhere from $10 to $60 per IP
address per year for as much as 32+1 static IP addresses.
Why should a Regional Internet Registry, one step up the food chain,
not charge the LIR's $1 per IP address per year? Fair's fair, right?
They charge the end users per-address so why shouldn't ARIN charge
them the same way?
William D. Herrin herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the ARIN-PPML