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

Steven Noble snoble at sonn.com
Sun Apr 7 13:44:58 EDT 2013

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.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list