Send ARIN-consult mailing list submissions to
        arin-consult@arin.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        arin-consult-requ...@arin.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
        arin-consult-ow...@arin.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-consult digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Consultation on Proposed 2018 Fee Schedule Changes
      (Steve Noble)
   2. Re: Consultation on Proposed 2018 Fee Schedule Changes
      (Rob Seastrom)
   3. Re: Consultation on Expanding the Size of the ARIN Board of
      Trustees (ARIN)
   4. Re: Consultation on Proposed 2018 Fee Schedule Changes
      (John Curran)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 12:49:46 -0700
From: Steve Noble <sno...@sonn.com>
To: John Curran <jcur...@arin.net>
Cc: Bill Woodcock <wo...@pch.net>, David Farmer <far...@umn.edu>,
        "<arin-consult@arin.net>" <arin-consult@arin.net>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Proposed 2018 Fee Schedule
        Changes
Message-ID: <5acbc3da.6090...@sonn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

Hi John,

This is a significant change and while you may personally view it as 
"modest increase", calling it so for those of us with a single object, 
is incorrect.  I have personally been forced to pay this fee even when 
ARIN refused to provide any services to me and note: ARIN has not 
refunded the money paid while you refused to provide any services, 
especially the ones you list below. If you are claiming that it costs 
$150 a year to have an entry in a whois server, I disagree, if nothing 
else it should be going down.  If you are saying that we should all pay 
the same whether we have more objects or need more help, I also 
disagree, you should charge end users based on their usage.

Looking at your tax filings, In 2015, you reported that more than half 
of your expenses were compensation at 9.1MM. For 2016 the number appears 
to be 10.8MM.  As Mr. Herrin noted, other organizations that have the 
same level of complexity, can do the work with significantly less 
engineers.  As a non-profit you should be focused on delivering value to 
your customers, not charging more for the same service.

For those who are interested, you can find the 990 filings for ARIN here 
: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/541860956

John Curran wrote:
>     For the vast majority end-users, the fee change results in a 
> modest $100 to $150 annual increase ?depending on
>     whether the organization has only one of IPv4 or IPv6 and an ASN, 
> or both IPv4 block, IPv6 block, and an ASN.
>     While the total impact is still quite small in terms of individual 
> end-user invoice, it is true that it could be deemed
>     a very significant increase when viewed on a percentage basis. 
>  This increase is not without corresponding value,
>     as the  services provided have been quite enhanced over time 
> (including improvements to ARIN Online allowing
>     easier administration, addition two-factor authentication, 
> streamlined request and ticket sections, etc.) so those
>     using ARIN services have indeed benefitted from ARIN?s investments 
> in staff and systems in recent years.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20180409/0cc6aed2/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:07:36 -0400
From: Rob Seastrom <r...@seastrom.com>
To: ARIN <i...@arin.net>
Cc: Robert Seastrom <r...@seastrom.com>, arin-consult@arin.net
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Proposed 2018 Fee Schedule
        Changes
Message-ID: <f4c9e7d8-c686-437f-8670-c73e90001...@seastrom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset=utf-8



> On Apr 9, 2018, at 9:43 AM, ARIN <i...@arin.net> wrote:
> 
> * Increasing the annual registry maintenance fee paid by end users
> for each IPv4 address block, IPv6 address block, and Autonomous System
> Number (?ASN?) from $100 to $150 per object. Registration Services Plan
> customers do not pay these annual registry maintenance fees as all
> services are already covered in their plan.

I would support this if it came with a modification of the LRSA to allow 
signatories to unravel it and return to their previous status without 
surrendering resources.

-r




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:42:02 -0400
From: ARIN <i...@arin.net>
To: arin-consult@arin.net
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Expanding the Size of the
        ARIN Board of Trustees
Message-ID: <9b1e42d9-b867-9472-7ad8-249943292...@arin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

On 9 April, the Consultation on Board Size was amended to include the 
link to the proposed Bylaws amendment necessary to effect the proposed 
change:

https://www.arin.net/about_us/bot/20180216/exhibit_e.pdf

Regards,

Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

On 4/6/18 2:14 PM, ARIN wrote:
> In May 2017, the ARIN Board of Trustees proposed expansion of the size 
> of the Board of Trustees in order to increase opportunities for 
> diversity in the background of Board members, including geographical 
> and gender representation. This proposal was the topic of an energetic 
> community consultation with mixed outcome indicating both support and 
> concerns with such a change. The ARIN Board considered the outcome of 
> the consultation, but ultimately the measure did not achieve the 
> four-fifths approval threshold necessary for changing ARIN's Bylaws.
>
> In February of this year, the ARIN Board discussed an additional issue 
> related to the present size of the Board: specifically, the challenge 
> that a smaller Board poses when engaging in strategic discussions, for 
> example in regard to long-term direction or relationships with other 
> Internet organizations. While many of these topics are discussed with 
> the community prior to decision (e.g. formation of the NRO, support 
> for the IANA Stewardship Transition), it is often up to the ARIN Board 
> of Trustees to decide whether to explore these initiatives when they 
> are at an early stage. There is a very wide diversity of the Internet 
> ecosystem that can be affected by ARIN's strategic direction and this 
> includes Internet service providers of all sizes and types (transit, 
> access, etc.), Internet online and content industries, data center and 
> cloud operators, educational and government networks, commercial 
> firms, and civil society. While the Trustees elected by the community 
> often have a broad knowledge of the Internet ecosystem, seven Trustees 
> is a relatively small group to evaluate impacts across the entire 
> Internet ecosystem.
>
> As a result of this discussion, the ARIN Board agreed to initiate a 
> new community consultation to expand the number of elected Board 
> members from six to nine, in order to allow for wider representation 
> of the Internet community during Board discussions.
>
> *Board proposal:*
>
> ARIN should add three more elected voting seats to the Board of 
> Trustees, raising the current six (two elected per year) to nine 
> (three elected per year). New Board seats are to be added to the Board 
> in a phased manner ? one per year in the 2018 thru 2020 elections as 
> noted below
>
>     * October 2018: 3 Board members will be elected for 2019; 8 
> Trustee board (9 if the appointed seat is used)
>     * October 2019: 3 Board members will be elected for 2020; 9 
> Trustee board (10 if the appointed seat is used)
>     * October 2020: 3 Board members will be elected for 2021; 10 
> Trustee board (11 if the appointed seat is used)
>
> We are seeking community feedback on this proposed change to the size 
> of the ARIN Board of Trustees. This consultation will remain open for 
> at least 30 days.
>
> Please provide comments to arin-consult@arin.net.
>
> Discussion on arin-consult@arin.net will close on 14 May 2018.
>
> If you have any questions, please contact us at i...@arin.net.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20180409/02dca7ce/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 21:23:07 +0000
From: John Curran <jcur...@arin.net>
To: Steve Noble <sno...@sonn.com>
Cc: "<arin-consult@arin.net>" <arin-consult@arin.net>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Proposed 2018 Fee Schedule
        Changes
Message-ID: <e77c32c2-bd1d-49d5-97d8-ce6907d9d...@arin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On 9 Apr 2018, at 3:49 PM, Steve Noble 
<sno...@sonn.com<mailto:sno...@sonn.com>> wrote:
Hi John,

This is a significant change and while you may personally view it as "modest 
increase", calling it so for those of us with a single object, is incorrect.  I 
have personally been forced to pay this fee even when ARIN refused to provide 
any services to me and note: ARIN has not refunded the money paid while you 
refused to provide any services, especially the ones you list below.

Steve -

   As discussed perviously on several ARIN mailing lists with you, ARIN does 
prevent
   parties with no clear association with a resource from making changes.  I 
believe that
   the specific issue has been cleared up in your case, but recognize that ARIN 
is also
   subject to parties attempting to hijack resources and thus is somewhat 
pedantic in this
   regard.

If you are claiming that it costs $150 a year to have an entry in a whois 
server, I disagree, if nothing else it should be going down.

   At this time, we charge $100 per year maintenance fee for all end-user 
resource records,
   and that is approximately 15% of ARIN?s total revenue (estimated $2.9M USD 
of ARIN?s
   $20.4M total revenue plan in 2019)

   We charge ISPs (and others who opt for it) under a registration services 
plan that is based
   on total number resource holdings, and in total is approximate 75% of ARIN 
annual revenue
   (estimated $14.4M USD of our $20.4M total revenue plan in 2019)

   We presently do not bill either customer category separately for making 
changes, interacting
   with ARIN, etc.  We could do so, but starting back in 2014 the community 
spent several
   years discussing fee models and ultimately came down to this simple model of 
having two
   major categories: ISP/registration services plan and End-users with 
Maintenance fees.

   That model has generally worked well, but over the next five years will 
result in a gradual
   reduction of ARIN?s financial reserves to approximately 50% of our annual 
budget.  Note
   that there are have been times in the past when we had the opposite problem, 
with reserves
   growing beyond our intended range (and ARIN customers concerned that we 
weren't fast
   enough in addressing their requests for improvements to our systems...)

   We did add additional staff and have made great progress in improvements to 
our systems ?
   this can be seen in both the list of accomplished functionality 
<https://www.arin.net/features/>
   as well as the results of our most recent customer satisfaction survey, 
which we will talk
   about in more detail next week at ARIN 41 in MIami.

   The question now posed by the ARIN Board of Trustees is whether the 
facilitator fees and
   end-user maintenance fees should be raised, as this would result in 
approximately $1.4M
   per year revenue and allow the organization to maintain a steady reserves 
position.

Looking at your tax filings, In 2015, you reported that more than half of your 
expenses were compensation at 9.1MM. For 2016 the number appears to be 10.8MM.  
As Mr. Herrin noted, other organizations that have the same level of 
complexity, can do the work with significantly less engineers.  As a non-profit 
you should be focused on delivering value to your customers, not charging more 
for the same service.

   ARIN is indeed focused on delivering more value to its customers ?

   You may not utilize our two-factor authentication system, our RPKI services, 
our improved
   interface for making resource requests and transfers, our RESTful interface 
to the registry,
   our RDAP services or now-being-refreshed IRR services,  but even if you do 
not use these
   services yourself, they make for a better and more accurate registry, and 
thus improve the
   value received by everyone.  The Board of Trustees ultimately has to decide 
the rate that we
   invest in our services, the best fee structure for recovery, and the most 
appropriate financial
   position ? hence this consultation seeking input on changing the fee 
schedule as proposed.

Thank you,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20180409/08732ba4/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
ARIN-consult mailing list
ARIN-consult@arin.net
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult

------------------------------

End of ARIN-consult Digest, Vol 67, Issue 16
********************************************

Reply via email to