[arin-ppml] Open Letter Regarding 650% Rate-Hike for Legacy Users

Wed Sep 15 20:50:40 EDT 2021

Its really great to see folkspassionate about leveling playing field for
small providers. Would it make sense for those interested to work on a
proposal together?

On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 5:17 PM Mark McDonald <markm at siteserver.com> wrote:

>
>
> *Confidentiality Notice:* This e-mail message, including any attachments,
> is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
> confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies
> of the original message.
>
> On Sep 15, 2021, at 4:35 PM, Warren Kumari <warren at kumari.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 6:47 PM <hostmaster at uneedus.com> wrote:
>
>> I think he is saying the categories did not change.  He never said that
>> everyone pays the same.  For as long as I can remember, us little ones
>> pay
>> LOTS more per IP than the big guys.
>
>
> Well, yes.
>
> But, I think that "paying per IP" is not a reasonable way to look at it -
> I don't call up and say "I'd like 7 please, with extra fries and hold the
> mayo".
> You are paying for registration and administration and similar.
>
>
> I disagree.  Strongly.  ARIN is handling 2048x the reverse lookup
> pointers, processing 2048x the SWIP events and whatever else is comprised
> of the services they offer.  And yes, that’s exactly how people “order”
> IP’s from service providers: “I’ll take 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc”.  Those
> result (or should result) in SWIP events @ ARIN.
>
>
>
>
>> When this is brought up, they always
>> point out those large guys pay a whole lot more than us.  What they fail
>> to consider is that they ALSO get a better price per IP.  As the example
>> you noted, they are paying 64 times LESS per IP than your /19.
>>
>> I have always considered that unfair.
>>
>
> In the county where I live, I need to pay an "Electrical Permit Fee" for
> "Service Equipment (new, temporary or replacement)". The fees are:
> 0 to 400 Amps -- $70
> Over 400 Amps -- $95
>
> I recently had to get a 60A panel installed, which meant that I was paying
> $1.16 per amp for the permit, while my neighbor, with a 400A panel only
> paid $0.18 per amp for his permit.
> A 400 Amp permit is $0.23 per amp, but if you are a large consumer and get
> a 2000A permit it works out to only $0.05 per amp.
>
> Perhaps this is unfair, and I should ask the county to charge permit costs
> by the amp instead -- but their work for issuing a 200A permit or a 400A
> permit is basically identical.
> The over 400A permit seems also roughly the same amount of work, but
> someone getting that level of service can presumably justify an additional
> $25 for the permit.
>
> I can’t even start to compare a limitless product (copper) to IPv4
> addresses.  Imagine if that same inspector told you he’s raising the price
> to inspect #6 wire 650% as that’s what ARIN is doing. ;)
>
> W
>
> (Many years ago a swore a solemn oath to myself to not get involved in
> arin-ppml threads. I'm not quite sure what has possessed me to break this
> oath, but I suspect I'll live to regret it...)
>
>
>> Albert Erdmann
>> Network Administrator
>> Paradise On Line Inc.
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Mark McDonald wrote:
>>
>> > Hi John,
>> > We must be looking at different fee charts.  Can you send me the one
>> you’re referring to?  We hold a /19 and fall under the “Small” service
>> category, paying roughly
>> > $0.12/IP/Year.  Right off the bat, we’re in the same service category
>> as someone holding a /18, so we’re paying twice as much per IPv4 Resource
>> as them - but wait, it
>> > gets much, much better.  Those holding a /8 are paying $0.0038/IP/Year
>> - *64X* less than our company per IPv4 resource.  Someone over there failed
>> math class if the
>> > goal was to level the costs among all users.
>> >
>> > If ARIN’s goal is to get everyone paying the same per/resource, our
>> bill should go down to $31.13/year so we’re paying the same per resource as
>> those issued /8’s.
>> >  For an organization that’s trying to promote IP conservation, your
>> metrics show you’re promoting the opposite - the larger the block, the less
>> I pay.
>> >
>> > I broke it all down for you here:
>> >
>> > CIDR Number of IP's Service Category Fee Fee per/IPv4 (Resource) % of
>> full cost (/24) per/resource
>> > /24 256 3X-Small $250.00 $0.9766
>> > /23 512 2X-Small $500.00 $0.9766 100.00%
>> > /22 1,024 2X-Small $500.00 $0.4883 50.00%
>> > /21 2,048 X-Small $1,000.00 $0.4883 50.00%
>> > /20 4,096 X-Small $1,000.00 $0.2441 25.00%
>> > /19 8,192 Small $2,000.00 $0.2441 25.00%
>> > /18 16,384 Small $2,000.00 $0.1221 12.50%
>> > /17 32,768 Medium $4,000.00 $0.1221 12.50%
>> > /16 65,536 Medium $4,000.00 $0.0610 6.25%
>> > /15 131,072 Large $8,000.00 $0.0610 6.25%
>> > /14 262,144 Large $8,000.00 $0.0305 3.13%
>> > /13 524,288 X-Large $16,000.00 $0.0305 3.13%
>> > /12 1,048,576 X-Large $16,000.00 $0.0153 1.56%
>> > /11 2,097,152 2X-Large $32,000.00 $0.0153 1.56%
>> > /10 4,194,304 2X-Large $32,000.00 $0.0076 0.78%
>> > /9 8,388,608 3X-Large $64,000.00 $0.0076 0.78%
>> > /8 16,777,216 3X-Large $64,000.00 $0.0038 0.39%
>> > /7 33,554,432 4X-Large $128,000.00 $0.0038 0.39%
>> > /6 67,108,864 4X-Large $128,000.00 $0.0019 0.20%
>> >
>> > I sincerely hope ARIN re-thinks this before implementation.  That’s
>> what would be fair and equitable for all.
>> >
>> > -Mark McDonald
>> > President/CEO
>> > Siteserver, Inc.
>> >
>> >
>> >       On Sep 15, 2021, at 1:05 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Mark -
>> >
>> > In April of this year, we announced a consultation on the matter of
>> harmonizing ARIN’s fees and many of the issues you raised were discussed at
>> that time on the
>> > ARIN-consult mailing list -
>> https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2021-April/date.html
>> >
>> > As noted in that discussion, 3621 end-user customers will see their
>> fees decrease as a result of change.  4431 end-users (those with larger IP
>> address holdings)
>> > will see their fees increase.  After the fee changes, all customers
>> will be paying the same fees based on their total IPv4 resources held.
>> >
>> > Regarding ISP/EU fees distribution, note that ARIN’s expected total
>> fees paid in 2021 are approximately $21 million – with ISP’s paying the
>> overwhelming
>> > majority of the costs at approximately $17M annually.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > /John
>> >
>> > John Curran
>> > President and CEO
>> > American Registry for Internet Numbers
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 15 Sep 2021, at 3:21 PM, Mark McDonald <markm at siteserver.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >       Mr. Curran,
>> >
>> >       It’s unfortunate to learn about ARIN’s proposal to increase our
>> rates by 650% from one year to the next from your EMail.  It would have
>> been nice to
>> >       receive this when this measure was being proposed.  In looking
>> through various member forums, it appears we aren’t alone.  While I can
>> appreciate
>> >       your desire to standardize rates between End Users and ISP’s,
>> it’s obvious that ARIN provides a different set of services for ISP’s as it
>> does End
>> >       Users.  For us, ARIN stores < 50k of data in a database - similar
>> to a Domain Registration from Network Solutions.  They’re somehow able to
>> perform
>> >       these services for about $9/year.  ARIN has historically charged
>> us $300/year for this service, and is now raising rates by 650% to
>> $2000.00/year.
>> >        And for what?  The IPv4 pool is depleted so there is no value in
>> attempting to obtain additional IPv4 resources, while IPv6 resources are
>> >       limitless, and are charged accordingly.
>> >
>> >       For End Users, there are no ongoing SWIP assignments or ongoing
>> actions from ARIN that require ARIN’s resources and for those that there
>> are, ARIN
>> >       charges for those services (new assignments, transfers, etc).  We
>> maintain numerous resources with ARIN through a different ISP account for
>> >       resources used for ISP services and pay fees (and utilize
>> services) accordingly.
>> >
>> >       When ARIN, or any organizational body, sends out an email stating
>> rates are raising 650%, it makes me question how an organization that could
>> do
>> >       something for a a set fee for so long suddenly can’t and needs to
>> implement drastic measures to “recoup” these fees.  It wreaks of
>> inefficiency as
>> >       ARIN’s number of resources managed is going up, not down and with
>> any business, the cost to provide services goes down as the number of
>> customers
>> >       (resources) goes up.
>> >
>> >       I was trying to look through the ARIN organizational documents
>> and recent Annual Reports to see how ARIN’s income is represented
>> (percentage of ISP
>> >       vs End-User, RSP vs Non-RSP) as your Email lacks this important
>> information, however I was unable to find this.  It would be much
>> appreciated if you
>> >       could provide it.  As a user of ARIN’s services, it would be nice
>> to see exactly how much of a rate increase this is (increasing ARIN
>> revenue) vs
>> >       standardizing rates, which would re-rate *everybody* (raising
>> some, lowering others) so that ARIN’s revenue remained neutral while
>> equally balancing
>> >       costs to provide services.
>> >
>> >       In owning and operating businesses in the IT space, I’ve always
>> viewed ARIN as a fair and equitable organization.  Until today.  Your email
>> lacked
>> >       critical information that would have shown this as a
>> “standardization of rates” vs a rate hike on what appears to be all legacy
>> customers.  Perhaps
>> >       the rates ARIN is charging them isn’t too low, but the rates
>> you’re charging ISP’s is too high, or perhaps somewhere in between.
>> >
>> >       From the Emails I’ve already received from other parties this
>> affects, it appears the courts will ultimately decide what is legitimate
>> and what is
>> >       not, however I feel this could have all been avoided with better
>> communication.
>> >
>> >
>> >       Sincerely,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >       Mark McDonald
>> >       _______________________________________________
>> >       ARIN-PPML
>> >       You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> >       the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> >       Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> >       https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> >       Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> ARIN-PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>
>
> --
> The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
> complexities of his own making.
>   -- E. W. Dijkstra
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
-- 
Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau
Books (Learning Spark, High Performance Spark, etc.):
https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9  <https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9>
YouTube Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/user/holdenkarau
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210915/f0f2fa4c/attachment.htm>