[arin-ppml] Fees for discouraging IPv4 (was: completely unrelated to 2008-6)

Charles Gucker cgucker at onesc.net
Fri Jan 2 19:54:58 EST 2009

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:46 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Lee Howard <spiffnolee at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> The renewal rates should be a flat per-ip rate
>> A few people have advocated for that structure; see below.
> Lee,
> For the record, you can include me in the list of advocates, though I
> have no idea what to do with the excess money. It would take totals
> rather higher than ARIN's annual budget for the XL's to treat
> conservation as a financial rather than moral issue.

Well, IMO, if ARIN was to collect higher fees for v4, it  should
extend the waiver for the cost for v6 until such time the "excess
funds" are depleted and at that time we return to the currently
planned v6 fee structure.

Again, just an opinion of a single observer.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list