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

[Steven Noble]

Hi John,

On Apr 7, 2013, at 10:35 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

>> 
> Steve - 
> 
>  The prior fee was $100 per year for all your resources;
>  I am uncertain why you felt it was $30?

I registered my ASN in 2000, at that time I was charged a $30 maintenance fee for the ASN.

> 
>  The revised fee schedule changes this for end-users and
>  legacy holders to $100 per year per resource record.

Which is again higher than the $30 that I originally paid before the "consolidated" fee.

> 
>> 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.
> 
>  It is a sliding scale under the revised fee schedule for 
>  end-users and legacy holders, but at $100 per record not
>  $30 per record as you suggest.

A sliding scale would start small for 1 ASN and then get larger (more than +n) for each ASN after that.  If someone holds 1 ASN, they would pay $30, if someone holds 2, they would pay $90, 3 ASNs would be $210, that type of a sliding scale.

>> 
>> 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.
> 
> That is helpful to know - Thank you!

No problem, obviously lower costs help push adoption.  If the cost of getting IPv6 is less than requesting both IPv4 and IPv6 it makes sense to me.