[arin-ppml] A modest proposal for IPv6 address allocations

Lee Howard spiffnolee at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 4 21:45:01 EDT 2009

> The real point being that the cost of doing an allocation takes someone a short 
> time to review the application for sanity. The cost of keeping an allocation in 
> the database is about the cost of running the whois server and its backing 
> database(s) on an ongoing basis, which is a lot lower than an ongoing 
> $562-2250/year.

ARIN does a great deal more than maintaining a single instance of a whois server.
For instance, there are redundant servers.   IN-ADDR. and IP6.ARPA, redundantly.
There's research and development into improving the system (RPKI, DNSsec, for
instance).  There's educational work around IPv6.
There's this wonderful mailing list, which has recently broken all records for activity.
Since there is so much room for debate, there are the public policy meetings, and
paying attention to what the other RIRs are doing, and reaching out to people who
wonder what this IP stuff is and what it has to do with DNS or DRM.  There's
evolution of the website, and facilitating a public policy process that allows people
in the community to elect representatives to oversee and facilitate the policies, the
process, and the organization.  There's the threat of litigation if ARIN does 
something poorly, and members of organizations like the ITU who think they could
do it better.

And still, when we ask the members for guidance, we hear either indifference [1]
or that fees should be higher [2].

So I start to wonder, why are ARIN's fees so low?

> Why we've all bought into the illusion that ARIN and ICANN really need this much 
> money to function, I don't know. Perhaps they do for IPv4 allocations, where 
> there's a lot less space and a lot more complaining, but IPv6 is just too easy 
> for it to really cost this much.

We don't really know how much IPv6 will cost.  I don't imagine many of ARIN's 
expenses will decrease under IPv6.  If there were no more debate about allocation
policies, and nobody else had any interest in us (politically or litigiously), and 
technology were fairly static, then we might just do periodic tech refreshes and be
fine.  I imagine all of those things will continue for a while, though, and ARIN will
need to be financially solvent through the transition.[3]


The thread on ARIN-discuss a while back: http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/2009-April/001154.html

Search for where MR. CURRAN says, "I have a question that actually the Board 
tasked me with asking" and read from there.

[3] ARIN publishes its current budget and Annual Reports at https://www.arin.net/about_us/corp_docs.html

> Matthew Kaufman
> Matthew Kaufman
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list