[arin-ppml] {Spam?} Re: Open Letter Regarding 650% Rate-Hike for Legacy Users

[John Curran]

On 19 Sep 2021, at 12:15 AM, Mark McDonald <markm at siteserver.com<mailto:markm at siteserver.com>> wrote:

Our rate hike alone covers the cost of responding to concerned organizations questioning why such a massive rate hike is needed that targets the smallest half of ARIN’s user base.  You realize the only reason people are complaining (and you’re on these forums defending it) is because such a few increase is almost unheard of, correct?  Of course the mega-carriers aren’t on here complaining - they’re paying less than *1%* of what /24 holders do.  Just wait until the actual bills go out.

Mark -

Actually, we’ve already spoken to some of the largest end-users whose fees are going up quite significantly (e.g. several hundred per year to 32 thousand dollars per year or more) – the organizations I’ve spoken to have wanted to understand the process and reasoning behind the change but have otherwise been quite understanding.

ARIN’s “a /8 ISP assignment costs just as much as a /24 end user” reasoning is ridiculous.

I actually haven’t said that – what I said is that your assertion that the costs are linear (i.e. per IP address represented) are not realistic, nor is the single fee per-registry-object-regardless-of-size approach realistic.

Our fee schedule scales in a geometric manner, so the smallest resource holders are paying only $250/year and the largest paying hundreds of thousands per year.   Does it reflect perfect cost allocation?  Almost certainly not, since it generallizations the entire ARIN customer base into a simple set of fee categories.  It may not be perfect but I believe it is as simple, fair and clear as is possible under the circumstances.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210919/a9f535e3/attachment.htm>