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

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Sun Oct 24 03:07:16 EDT 2010

...financial backpressure will be much more effective than any proscriptive language that makes it past ppml.

This is definitely true

The hardest part of that approach is that the fee for a provider that is offering dual-stack /48 to each customer should be substantially less than a 6rd deployment offering /60. It is not ARIN's role to define end  product offerings, so differentiating the fee schedule for 2 ISPs requesting a /28 based on how they plan to use it is probably out of the question.

So how do you get your escalating fee structure without doing that? This sounds like a hard problem, administratively and economically. And you're right, once the fees are set they will establish parameters around which implementations are incentivized. I can't tell from all the list noise where things are going but it does seem to me that policy and fees are becoming more closely related all the time, which may require another look at ARIN's separation of the two.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20101024/14b78831/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list