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

Randy Carpenter rcarpen at network1.net
Sun Sep 19 23:45:12 EDT 2021



----- On Sep 19, 2021, at 9:52 PM, Michel Py via ARIN-PPML arin-ppml at arin.net wrote:

> 
> 
> I probably missed something, but the registration services plan did not make
> sense to me earlier. When I added it up, it was cheaper to pay separately.

My end-user ORG has been opting for the Registration Services Plan for just about as long as it has been an option. It has always mirrored the ISP fee schedule and as such, IPv4+IPv6+ASN(s) have been all under a single fee, based on the larger of the IPv4 or IPv6 size category. That doesn't necessarily mean it is less expensive for every ORG, but there are many for whom it would be.

> This is another of your bait-and-switch schemes.

Huh? What are you talking about?


>> (Note that you can even add a small IPv6 block to that and still not see any
>> annual fee change...)
> 
> Nice try, but I'm not falling for it.

Falling for what? Have you read the fee schedule? It is right there in black and white. There is no nuance or shady complicated language. It just is.


> As I said earlier, I don't think that ARIN
> should be in the business of incentives to deploy IPv6.

Why? If not them, then who?


> As I said earlier too, this will go to court at some point. I am not going to
> tie my company and open the floodgates to IPv6 obligations for $100 a year.
> It is not worth the risk.

Again, what are you talking about? Risk of what? Floodgates?!? 


> I will eat the $100 increase and stay IPv4-only.

No you won't. As previously shown, your fees are going to go down.


> I will not deploy IPv6 and challenge ARIN all the way to the supreme court if I
> have to.

Why won't you reply IPv6? Challenge them for what?


> A part of ARIN stakeholders feels that we should not be paying you more than
> half a million dollars a year to keep promoting a protocol that has failed for
> 20 years. Sooner or later, there will be a vote of no-confidence.

A vote of no-confidence for whom? The global internet? ICANN? You are not making any sense at all. I can assume you are talking specifically about Mr, Curran, but it is not like he unilaterally decides anything about fees or policies, so it still doesn't make sense.

In regard to IPv6, I would not at all called it failed at all. The reason it is not as ubiquitous is because of ignorance and attitudes of companies and individuals like you.


Maybe it is time to put a policy in place that requires all ORGs to have a basic training course in how number resources work. If you lack the basic understanding of the policies involved, then you shouldn't qualify for the resources.


-Randy


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list