nanog mailing list archives

Re: Redundant AS's


From: Hank Nussbacher <hank () efes iucc ac il>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:48:50 +0200 (IST)

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Heather Schiller wrote:

I don't think old vs new really matters.. pardon me for sticking w/ ARIN in this example.. I can follow their fee structure easiest - and doesn't have the old vs new: (https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html)

ARIN charges $100/yr for ASN's ... any "compensation" for returning an ASN should be less than the $100 they charge? Would it make any financial sense to compensate someone $500 for returning an ASN that only generates $100 a year? (Remember that the RIR's are non-profits..)

Well old vs new does have consequences. I have many ASNs issued since 1996, yet they were never charged.

See 2006: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-360.pdf
"Note: AS Numbers, PI IPv4 and IPv6 special purpose assignments issued before 1 October 2004 will NOT count toward the 2006 billing score." As it had been up till that point.

Yet in 2007: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-392.pdf
that rule changed and suddenly older allocations were suddenly billed. So a LIR that issued ASNs to customers and only charged them a one-time fee in 1996-2006 (processing and handling) is suddenly saddled with additional costs that they can no longer pass on to the customer.

I wonder what ARIN did in that regards.

Regards,
Hank


Current thread: