[arin-ppml] Opposed to 2010-9 and 2010-12

[Hannigan, Martin]

On 10/26/10 12:39 PM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

worth pursuing further.


Putting in hard dates to try to sunset an address range will just lead to endless debate.

Agreed, but the escalating fees also require a somewhat arbitrary setting of the escalation rate. Double every year, or every two years? Doubling starts after [three][five][N] years?

Putting in an explicit cost that is only borne by those who need the crutch will result in a natural weaning.

Agreed

As much as I don’t want to see 6rd in a different prefix range, maybe that is the out here. Create a specific fee schedule for a dedicated use prefix range, which would enable a path forward in the short term at the same time it motivates providers to get off of the technology asap.

That might work. Herrin was proposing segregation of prefix ranges for other purposes, got some flak but I can’t remember exactly what for.

Another possibility might simply be to impose a 6rd surcharge that increases. If I am correct in assuming that 6rd users have to declare what they are doing in order to qualify for the larger blocks of addresses, the fee could be triggered by the declaration rather than the use of a specific address range.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20101026/a7f17d92/attachment.htm>