[arin-ppml] IP Address Fee Structure Policy and the Right of Education

[Christopher Mettin]

ARIN Community,

Why does ARIN manage the IP addresses allocated to North America? Did they
win a competition in cost-effeteness and reliability?

And does ARIN show a proof that the fees cover at least 90% of their
operating costs?

If IANA would replace ARIN with GQHS today, I could offer everyone a /20
block for just $10 annually and no cent more. GQHS will also have less
operation costs and that will save our environment a lot.

I will propose this idea to IANA soon. Maybe "Virginian non-profit" actually
means they just don't have any stocks but I bet they make a million revenue
each year. At all, they are not the right organization to manage IP
addresses it seems.

Has anyone a problem with IP addresses given away for as cheap as a .com
domain?

Sincerely yours,
Christopher

-----Original Message-----
From: Per Heldal [mailto:heldal at eml.cc] 
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 6:05 AM
To: Christopher Mettin
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Fee Structure Policy and the Right of
Education

On 11/29/2009 02:16 AM, Christopher Mettin wrote:
> The fact that one can't access the Internet without an IP address and that
> ARIN sells them.

RIR's don't sell IP-addresses. Addresses are assigned for a documented 
purpose. The RIRs are not-for-profit organisations. The fee is not for 
the IP-addresses themselves, but rather to cover the administrative 
costs of running the RIR-operations organization.

>> My suggestion would be that you hit up your respective ISPs to give you
>> static addresses at no extra charge for the good will and possible tax
>> benefits.  Even if they're only willing to give you /29s, you can
>> harmonize your RFC1918 address space use and use VPNs that properly
>> reflect your security policies.
>
> Yep, VPS, you cannot set them up so easily if you don't have a commonly
> known (static) IP address of the end-point. Where should we send the VPS
> connection request if our IP always changes? Maybe try out every host on
the
> entire ISP subnet?
>
> Our Internet connection is paid by the state. And under the current
contract
> we actually even not allowed to publish a simple website from our network.
> So why should they give us a static IP to make it easier for us to do so?
>

You can not blame the internet-community for your organisation's failure 
to negotiate a contract that meets your needs. I doubt you'll find a 
serious SP anywhere that doesn't offer contracts that include static 
addressing. So far there's been no mention of a need for multi-homing 
which normally is the key requirement to justify direct assignments. 
What difference does the fee make if you don't qualify for an allocation 
in the first place.


> So the reason why ARIN should change its policies is that we want ARIN to
> allocate us some IP addresses which are the only way for us to solve our
> little problem.

You should resolve this with the people who are responsible for a 
service-contract that doesn't meet your functional requirements.


//per