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

[Owen DeLong]

> On Sep 19, 2021, at 12:54 , David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 10:05 PM Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>> wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Sep 18, 2021, at 03:04 , John Curran <jcurran at arin.net <mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:
> > You can assert that ARIN's costs are predominantly the result of “LIRs” but that doesn’t reflect reality – many of our services and functions are equivalent for an entire address block and only a small set of them are related to subdelegation functions.   
> 
> IRR
> RPKI
> SWIP/RDAP/WHOIS
> RDNS
> Frequency of updates
> Frequency of additional requests/transfers/etc.
> 
> are all impacted more by LIRs than by end users.
> 
> Yes, there is a difference in the impact on these services by LIR vs end-user, however I believe total size of allocations or assignments are a much better predictor of the impact on usage levels of those services.

As I have previously stated… If end-users that aren’t using these various services could get an appropriate multiplier (e.g. 0.6*table), I am not opposed to tiered pricing for end users. I am opposed to end users paying the same as LIRs because that is an unfair subsidy to LIRs on the backs of end users.

> So, currently end-users don't have access to SWIP, so how do you know they don't have good uses for it? Probably not good enough to pay more, but if it didn't cost more would they find uses for it? It is pretty easy to imagine it could be useful for multijurisdictional end-users to SWIP their offices in different states and countries, and I'm fairly sure there are other uses as well. 

If those uses are desirable, then there are alternatives already available that don’t involve ARIN… RWHOIS, RDAP, etc.

> Also, take my WISP or small ISP example, from earlier in the thread, if there is a pricing differential on whether or not they SWIP or not, then you create a financial disincentive for them to SWIP the one or two customers they might have that justify SWIPing.  So then, they either skirt or break the rules, or even worse, they don't serve those customers because that would upset their delicate financial model. 

Again, in such a case, they should be allowed to make the choice between running their own server or paying for SWIP.

> On the other hand, there’s also the fact that the LIRs are (generally) using their addresses directly for profit (i.e. their business _IS_ (at least in part) providing IP addresses to their customers). Essentially, they are reselling RIR services.
> End users, OTOH, tend to be using addresses to run their organization, many of which are not for profit and some of which are even individuals or families. They aren’t reselling registration services for profit.
> 
> You're making a moral argument here, not a technical one. I'd be fine with nonprofit/not-for-profit discounts, however, nonprofits can be fairly large concerns, take ARIN itself as an example. However, personal use get's pretty fuzzy and is too easily abused, at least in my opinion. Furthermore, there are plenty of for profit uses that can make a much larger profit per IP address than selling connectivity or addressing services. Why should those uses get preferential pricing? They are still using IP addresses to make money, even brick and mortar companies are making much more of a profit from Internet sales. 

Fairness of fees is a moral issue, not a technical one.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210919/18a1461f/attachment.htm>