[arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2021-8: Deprecation of the ‘Autonomous System Originations’ Field

[Owen DeLong]

> On Nov 1, 2022, at 19:49, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 1 Nov 2022, at 9:21 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Nov 1, 2022, at 12:14, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net <mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Owen - 
>>> 
>>> That was your choice:  you could have consolidated into a single billing relationship if you wished or opted (as you did) to maintain distinct billing relationships in which each relationship was billed for services for a distinct and non-overlapping set of resources.   
>> 
>> No, I didn’t want to be bifurcated in the first place… I was given no choice in that, nor was I given the option of vacating the LRSA in light of this material adverse change.
> 
> You had the option to consolidate to a single billing relationship for all of the resources, but choose not to do so. 

I had one ORG-ID and one bill. I didn’t change my contracts and suddenly I was faced with two ORG-IDs and twice the billing.

That wasn’t my decision, it was a decision and action taken by the ARIN board. Yes, I had the subsequent option to pay even more and consolidate to a single ORG-ID. I found an alternative solution and am back to a single ORG-ID with ARIN and single billing now.
It required me to move my legacy resources under RIPE management. So be it.

I’m still paying more than 5x what I was originally paying for a single organization when I signed the LRSA for my non-LRSA resources alone.

In exchange for that 5x bump in fees, I now have voting rights for the first time in ARIN history, but that’s the only gain I’ve made for all that additional money.

> I shan’t belabor the point further, but rather reiterate that continued assertion of “double charging” by ARIN (under circumstances where you chose to maintain two distinct billing relationships) can only be seen as an intentional misrepresentation and is specifically prohibited by the mailing list AUP. 

Just because you want to limit the scope of the discussion to what occurred after the board took the original action that split my organization in two doesn’t make what I am saying a misrepresentation of what happened.

Indeed, I would say you are the one making a misrepresentation by pretending that I chose to be bifurcated in the first place. I did not.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20221101/6005c9b5/attachment.htm>