nanog mailing list archives
Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing
From: "NetSurfer" <netsurf () pixi com>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 08:37:36 -0000
Proposed charging up to $20,000 for IP addresses - more unsubstantiated rumor? ---------- From: David Stoddard <dgs () us net> To: nanog () merit edu Cc: jfbb () atmnet net Subject: Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing Date: Friday, March 28, 1997 8:29 PM 8< snip 8< snip 8< snip For the sake of discussion, this is the following fee structure that has been proposed by ARIN (see the ARIN proposal page at http://www.arin.net/arin_proposal.html): Small $2500/year /24 - /19 Medium $5000/year >/19 - /16 Large $10K/year >/16 - /14 X-Large $20K/year >/14 Fees are based on your total allocation for the previous year, plus another $1,000 per year to maintain membership in ARIN. It is safe to say that any ISP able to receive address blocks falls somewhere between Medium and X-Large on this chart. --------- As for an IANA Statement on the subject: http://www.arin.net/iana.html ========================================= IANA Statement on ARIN (1/14/97) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Internet Assigned Nunbers Authority (IANA) views the move by Network Solutions to promote the creation of the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) as a non-profit, self-supporting, independent operation as a very positive step and fully supports the general concept. --jon. Jon Postel Internet Assigned Numbers Authority ---------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing John Curran (Mar 29)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing NetSurfer (Mar 30)
- Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing David R. Conrad (Mar 30)
- Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing Randy Bush (Mar 31)
- Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing NetSurfer (Mar 31)