IPv4 address exchange

Jeffrey Lyon jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net
Tue Apr 19 21:11:51 UTC 2011

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Jeff Wheeler <jsw at inconcepts.biz> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Benson Schliesser
> <bensons at queuefull.net> wrote:
>> Meanwhile, under the current system, ARIN has managed to accumulate a >$25M cash reserve despite an increasing budget. (see https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_XXVII/PDF/Wednesday/andersen_treasurer.pdf)
> If you want ARIN to reduce its fees, you can propose that.  The
> fiduciaries at ARIN may say, "you're right, we do have more money than
> we need or foresee to need to operate," and recommend that fees be
> reduced.  They may provide justification for this "war chest," such as
> the possibility of legal battles over address transfers.  Who knows?
> Is your problem that ARIN spends its money poorly?  I believe it does
> in some ways, but the community generally does not care enough to try
> to improve this.  I questioned ARIN's travel budget a few years ago
> and was essentially flamed for doing so.
> You seem to think the difference between ARIN's expenditures and
> revenues is too large, resulting in a large cash reserve.  Okay, if
> that's important to you, there is a forum for that discussion.  I
> don't think anything will be done about it through a discussion on
> NANOG, but you can certainly bring it up on the various ARIN mailing
> lists, or ask ARIN board/staff to share their thoughts with you.
> I really don't think the cost of ARIN fees for IP address and ASN
> allocations are all that important to ARIN members.  In my position as
> a senior technical resource for numerous ARIN members, I am much more
> interested in ARIN providing more services to members, or improving
> upon existing ones (IRR), than I am in any reduction of fees.  Again,
> my position is reflected clearly in my public mailing list posts on
> this subject.
> Note that one of the things I think ARIN should improve upon, which
> ARIN has committed to improve, is its IRR database.  There are already
> alternatives available, I'm glad ARIN has decided to increase the
> usefulness and quality of its IRR database.  If they don't, you can
> still choose to use a third-party database.
> I don't share your view that a fragmented WHOIS/DNS ecosystem would be
> all that beneficial to stakeholders.  In the absence of ARIN members
> flocking to PPML to complain about ARIN's travel budget or its
> increasing cash reserve, I don't think ARIN members are particularly
> concerned about reducing ARIN's fees.
> --
> Jeff S Wheeler <jsw at inconcepts.biz>
> Sr Network Operator  /  Innovative Network Concepts

I recall supporting your objective to ARIN's budget, to include travel
and conventions. If memory serves, Mr. Curran simply stated that this
is what the community wants and they see value in having ARIN travel
all over the region.

On the subject of an IPv4 market place, would it be feasible to
suggest that ARIN allow pure market economy and then broker the deals,
collecting a commission on sales rather than annual maintenance fees?

Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications - AS32421
First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions

More information about the NANOG mailing list