[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs

[Steven Noble]

On Apr 7, 2013, at 10:13 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

> 
> Actually, there is a significantly more registry operations 
> and development costs associated with IP address blocks than
> AS numbers, if only because IP address blocks for ISPs end up
> with subassignments to customers, and this ends up in Whois
> via SWIP or restful interfaces.  While we have lowered fees
> (and doing so again with this change) for the smaller ISPs,
> it still does not compare to either "free" or the nominal 
> $100 per record fee for legacy holders.

This I understand, thank you John.  I do not consider $100 nominal, when the cost was $30 it was nominal, with the new fee schedule instead of lowering the fee back to $30 and charging for each ASN, ARIN is raising the fees for ASNs to $100 each.  Why not make a sliding scale?  Those who consume more resources as a single ORG pay more: $30 for first ASN, $60 for second, etc.
> 
> Do you have a view on whether or not policy should be changed
> (as proposed in ARIN-2013-3) to allow ISPs to request an IPv6
> allocation of /40 if they want to, or should they be limited
> to at least a /36 allocation per current policy?

I believe it will allow for more IPv6 deployment which is the end goal.  I can debate in my head paying $500 to have IPv6 PI space, I cannot justify paying $1000+ yearly.