[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations

[Paul Andersen]

> On Apr 13, 2020, at 11:55 AM, Andrew Dul <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
> 
> I will also like to note, that this issue could also be remedied by the board adopting a small change to the fee schedule such that the 3x-small IPv6 holdings do not force a change in category for 3x-small organizations. This would cause 3x-small organization's fees to be primarily determined by their IPv4 holdings not their IPv6 holdings.
> 
> While the community doesn't have purview over fees we have input into that process.  If this is something that we would strongly like to prefer as a solution to this problem.  We can make this as a strong suggestion to the board for their consideration.
> 

We have reviewed similar suggestions before. Fees are always complex because we need to recover costs in a fair and equitable manner. The current fee structure has tried to ensure there is simplicity and predictability while accomplishing this and we’ve had a lot of feedback that is important. Adjusting the schedule to account for this starts to complicate things both for users of our services and ARIN. 

With that in mind we have taken suggestions like this seriously in the past and give them serious deliberation. Look forward to seeing the discussion and input.

Cheers,

Paul

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20200414/dec0c3ee/attachment.htm>