[173063] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Tue Jul 15 12:02:08 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: Brett Glass <nanog@brettglass.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:01:51 +0000
In-Reply-To: <201407151509.JAA01451@mail.lariat.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Jul 15, 2014, at 10:58 AM, Brett Glass <nanog@brettglass.com> wrote:
> Here's the thing. With physical goods, there are economies of scale in
> shipping and delivering them in bulk. But IP addresses are simply numbers=
!
Actually, they're not even discrete numbers, but address blocks (If there
were specific costs associated with administration of individual IP address=
es,=20
ARIN would have collapsed under the astronomical cost increase of receiving=
=20
the allocation of 83,076,749,736,557,242,056,487,941,267,521,536 [/12] IPv6
addresses for this region...)
Actual cost to administer, i.e. maintain in the database and ARIN systems,=
=20
invoice each holder, provide reverse DNS, etc. is actually remarkably simil=
ar=20
for ARIN regardless of address block size, e.g.whether it is IPv4 /8, /16,=
=20
/20, /24 or an IPv6 /32 or /48.
ARIN has consistently lowered ISP fees over the years (more than four times=
so=20
far) but it is still worth revisiting, and there is a Fee Structure Review =
Report=20
that will be forthcoming that looks at very approaches going forward. I wi=
ll
make sure to notify the NANOG community as well, as we want as many voices =
as
possible in the discussion which will take place the latter half of this ye=
ar.
Thanks!
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
