North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: PROPOSAL #2 - reform of the fee schedule (fwd)
- From: Steve Sobol
- Date: Mon Jun 01 15:35:11 1998
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
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.
> 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.