[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [hm-staff] Re: [sig-nir] Proposal_Abolishing IPv6 per addressfee for NIRs
Dear Anne,
Thank you for the recommendation. It's a good suggestion to post the
proposal on the Policy SIG ML as I believe that are not many non-NIR
people subscribed to this list.
May I clarify that this is to introduce and encourage people to join
the discussions at NIR SIG and not to move the discussions to the
Policy SIG? I understand that it requires approval at AMM after
consensus at NIR SIG.
Regards,
Izumi
From: Anne Lord <anne@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [hm-staff] Re: [sig-nir] Proposal_Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:05:42 +1000
>
> Dear Billy,
>
> Thank you for your proposal. The Secretariat will take a look at the
> proposal and will provide some feedback.
>
> Following on from Izumi's point there you may wish to consider posting this
> proposal to the "sig-policy" mailing list. I would strongly recommend you
> do this, so that you gather input from APNIC members and other
> stakeholders, since this proposal will need to go through both the policy
> process and be voted on by APNIC members at a members meeting.
>
> regards
> Anne
> --
>
>
> At 04:59 PM 28/03/2005, Izumi Okutani wrote:
> >Dear Billy,
> >
> >
> >Thank you for submitting a proposal on a revision of the fee scheme
> >for NIRs.
> >
> >This issue will concern APNIC membership as a whole, so comments are
> >welcome from NIRs as well as from other APNIC members and the APNIC
> >secretariat.
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >Izumi
> >NIR SIG Chair
> >
> >From: "MH Billy Cheon" <cmh@nic.or.kr>
> >Subject: [sig-nir] Proposal_Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs
> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:44:49 +0900
> >
> > > Dear All,
> > >
> > > Please ignore the previous mail. I think I made a mistake.
> > > This is the final version.
> > >
> > > Sorry for causing confusion :-)
> > >
> > > Billy
> > >
> > >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Draft Proposal Draft Proposal Draft Proposal Draft
> > Proposal Draft Proposal Draft Proposal
> > >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > o Proposal : "Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs"
> > >
> > > This paper proposes that APNIC should not charge per address fee
> > > for IPv6 allocations to NIRs until it is necessary.
> > >
> > > o Background
> > >
> > > The current APNIC fee scheme for NIRs consist of "Annual Membership
> > Fee"
> > > and "Per Address Fee".
> > >
> > > Annual Membership Fee:
> > > Fee charged annually to all APNIC members based on the amount of
> > > address space that member holds. The annual membership fee is
> > > determined by the same method as that of standard APNIC members.
> > >
> > > Per Address Fee: (additionally charged to NIRs)
> > > Fee charged to NIRs for every IPv4 and IPv6 allocations made to
> > > NIRs/NIR members. It is calculated with a defined formula which
> > > allocation size set as a variable. Refer to "Sec 3.4 Per-address
> > > fee for confederation member" in APNIC Fee Schedule Document
> > > for more details.
> > >
> > > e.g.)
> > > A "very large" member(NIR) pays the following per fee for:
> > >
> > > /17 IPv4 allocation $983.04(32,768 x $0.03)
> > > /30 IPv6 allocation $648.57(21,619 x $0.03)
> > >
> > > o Reasons
> > >
> > > 1. Fairness
> > > Fee schedule for NIRs disadvantages NIRs/NIR members compared to
> > > APNIC direct members. NIRs/NIR members are obliged to pay per
> > > address fees for allocations received from APNIC, while APNIC direct
> > > members are not required to pay such fees. It is not desirable to
> > > have different fee conditions between NIRs/NIR member and APNIC
> > direct
> > > members for the same resource.
> > >
> > > 2. Amount of Fee
> > > In addition to the issue of fairness, the current IPv6 per address
> > > fee scheme leads NIRs/NIR members to pay unexpectedly large amount
> > > of fees. For example, one of the NIRs has paid $63,574 to APNIC
> > > for a /21 IPv6 allocation in year 2004, which is even larger in
> > > amount than the annual membership fee of the NIR(US$40,000). Other
> > > NIRs are also expected to face the same problem under the current
> > > fee scheme, and this is clearly disproportionate not only for
> > > NIRs, but also from APNIC's budget planning perspective.
> > > Therefore, a new reasonable NIR fee scheme should be set up.
> > >
> > > 3. Deployment of IPv6
> > > Considering the current status of IPv6 address deployment in the
> > > AP region, it will take some time before it will be fully deployed
> > > and commercialized. Most of ISPs in the AP region are not
> > > providing connectivity service with IPv6 addresses at this
> > > stage. Charging per address fee in IPv6 may hinder the deployment
> > > of IPv6 in the region.
> > >
> > > 4. Situation in other RIRs.
> > > Other RIRs, do not charge IPv6 per address fee. For example,
> > >
> > > ARIN's fee schedule for IPv6 is as follows:
> > >
> > > "Organizations that are General Members in good standing
> > > prior to requesting an initial IPv6 allocation are not charged
> > > IPv6 registration fees. Annual renewal fees for IPv6 allocations
> > > are also waived for General Members in good standing.
> > > ARIN will continue to waive these fees as long as
> > > the organization remains a General Member in good standing
> > > at the time of renewal, up until Dec. 31, 2006."
> > >
> > > LACNIC IPv6 Fee Schedule:
> > >
> > > "Currently, and until new LACNIC board decision, organizations
> > > qualifying to receive IPv6 will have the first two years fees
> > > waived. This means, the initial fee and the first annual renewal
> > fee."
> > >
> > > o Effect on APNIC
> > >
> > > It is speculated that abolishing per address for IPv6 allocations
> > > will not affect APNIC's budget. This is based on studying the past
> > > trend of APNIC budget as below:
> > >
> > > Year 2001 % 2002 %
> > 2003 % 2004 %
> > > ------------- --------------
> > -------------- --------------
> > > Member fees 2,472,532 72% 2,871,724 75% 3,409,078
> > 76% 3,510,392 72%
> > > Per Addr v4 523,023 15% 414,301
> > 11% 410,471 9% 569,459 12%
> > > Per Addr
> > v6 4,543 0% 8,232 0% 7,803 0%
> > 65,721 1%
> > > Non-mem
> > fees 37,037 1% 66,105 2% 80,994 2%
> > 27,686 1%
> > > Applic
> > fees 152,401 4% 293,459 8% 351,845 8%
> > 351,188 7%
> > > Other
> > income 245,945 7% 160,667 4% 227,269 5%
> > 363,811 7%
> > > ------------- --------------
> > -------------- --------------
> > > Tota 3,435,482 3,814,488
> > 4,487,461 4,888,257
> > > ------------- --------------
> > -------------- --------------
> > >
> > > * APNIC has been running its budget with hardly any revenues from
> > > IPv6 per address fees(approximately 0%) until year 2003. In year
> > > 2004, it merely covered approximately 1%(US$65,721) of APNIC's
> > > total budget. This implies that the revenue portion from IPv6 per
> > > address fee is minimal.
> > >
> > > o Benefits
> > >
> > > - Abolishing per address fee for IPv6 allocations solves
> > > "unfairness" between NIRs and other APNIC members.
> > >
> > > - Abolishing per address fee for IPv6 allocations saves NIRs/NIR
> > > members from the burden of paying large amount fees beyond
> > > a reasonable level.
> > >
> > > - Abolishing per address fee for IPv6 may prevent APNIC fee scheme
> > > being the barrier of IPv6 deployment in the AP region.
> > >
> > > o Disadvantage
> > >
> > > - None
> > >
> > > * References *
> > >
> > > [ARIN IPv6 Fee Schdule]
> > > http://www.arin.net/registration/fee_schedule.html#ipv6_alloc
> > >
> > > [LACNIC IPv6 Fee Schdule]
> > > http://lacnic.net/en/registro/table.html
> > >
> > > [APNIC Fee Schedule]
> > > http://www.apnic.net/docs/corpdocs/member-fee-schedule.doc
> > >
> > >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Draft Proposal Draft Proposal Draft Proposal Draft
> > Proposal Draft Proposal Draft Proposal
> > >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >sig-nir mailing list
> >sig-nir@lists.apnic.net
> >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir
> >_______________________________________________
> >Hostmaster-staff mailing list
> >Hostmaster-staff@apnic.net
> >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/hostmaster-staff
>
> _______________________________________________
> sig-nir mailing list
> sig-nir@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir
>
>
