[571] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 206.82.160.0/22
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Geoff Huston)
Tue Sep 26 17:18:40 1995
From: Geoff Huston <G.Huston@aarnet.edu.au>
To: jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 07:09:42 +1000 (EST)
Cc: davidc@apnic.net, nmw@haven.ios.com, cidrd@iepg.org,
jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu, nanog@MERIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9509261950.AA04633@ginger.lcs.mit.edu> from "Noel Chiappa" at Sep 26, 95 03:50:30 pm
Resent-From: nanog@MERIT.EDU
> there will be a cost associated with requesting address space: US
> $10,000/year for Large ISPs ... US $2,500/year for Small ISPs ...
> >> The category is self-determined by the organization.
>
> Everyone's going to classify themselves as the smallest, then...
dunno about that - you are talking about rational behaviour vs Pride
and Vanity.
I'll back P & V any day!
> Such an approach is perhaps not as clean as charging for IP address
> space directly, but it does seem to be a reasonable compromise given
> political and theological constraints. ... Note that you should stress
> charging for registration services as opposed to charing for address
> space. The latter is a political minefield that will simply muddy the
> waters.
>
> If you vary your charge based on the size of the organization, how do you
> justify that in terms of what it takes you in internal resources? Surely a
> registration of a small ISP takes as much time/etc as a large one?
>
> I understand your hesitancy about the "charging for addresses" issue, but
> trying to effectively charge for addresses based on something nebulous like a
> varying registration fee based on organization size just isn't going to pass
> the "quack" test. People will see right through it... Heck, I don't mind
> charging for addresses, they are a limited resource. Use the money to fund
> IETF work.
Noel - you are reacting as a rational human being - the ISP world
doesn't necessarily act in that way!
Geoff
