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

[John Curran]

On 19 Sep 2021, at 1:12 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:

On Sep 19, 2021, at 06:32 , John Curran <jcurran at arin.net<mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:
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.

You got two out of three. It’s as simple and clear as possible.

Thanks – that’s good to hear.

It clearly subsidizes LIRs on the backs of end users that are just ever so slightly larger than the very smallest.

It is true that the 8022 end-user customers will be paying a larger portion of overall registry expenses (totaling approx. 1/3 of ARIN's total costs), but “subsidizes” is probably not a correct characterization – as they will be paying $860 per year on average as compared to the $2341 paid annually on average by the existing ISP customers.

Yes, this does mean an increase in annual fee for those end-users organizations who have more IPv4 number resources, but it also means a reduction for more than three thousand end-user organizations who have the typical single /24 IPv4 address block.

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/a7fefb12/attachment.htm>