North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: PROPOSAL #2 - reform of the fee schedule (fwd)
On Thu, May 28, 1998 at 07:27:39PM -0500, Karl Denninger wrote: > Therefore, I argue that the fees should be *proportionate* to the existing > space. A good idea. While working fulltime for NACS.NET (I don't any longer), a few months ago, I checked out ARIN's site to find out how much a /19 would be, because NACS is going to need some more IP's soon. The price was, ahhhh, shall we say, a little high :) > This is *FAIR*. We're now charging for the amount of verification work to > be performed and EVERY allocation is treated equally. > > Now the reality is that this will put us WAY over budget. This is GOOD. > What we need to do then is cut the base membership fee to something that > ordinary people can afford - $50/year. Um, yeah. > The stakeholders should have a say in this, and the stakeholders, folks, are > the average users. Um, yeah. :) > Would someone please tell me why this isn't a more proper fee strategy? [wisecracks withheld] ;) Karl, I think that makes a lot more sense than the justification I got over the phone from one of the people at ARIN... "we're not government- subsidized any more" -- which may be TRUE, but it's not justification for the fees they're asking for. -- Steven J. Sobol - Founding Member, Postmaster/Webmaster, ISP Liaison -- Forum for Responsible & Ethical E-mail (FREE) - Dedicated to education about, and prevention of, Unsolicited Broadcast E-mail (UBE), also known as SPAM. Info: http://www.ybecker.net |