| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
> I concur with Randy, and as I am sure you already know, I am against the > proposal. :-) Thank you all for expressing your opinions. I note that all of the non-NIR people who have expressed comments on the list believe we should postpone the proposal until we come up with an alternative fee structure. If NIRs still feel that the proposal should be implemented *at this particular time*, could somebody from an NIR(or NIRs) can explain the reason for this? Otherwise, the discussions will be parallel between NIRs/NIR members and the rest of APNIC memebers, so I think we should re-consider this proposal. Izumi > Stephan Millet > > On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 06:07, Randy Bush wrote: > >>i can not support the proposal unless it is accompanied by >>a replacement proposal. it just makes no business sense >>without that. >> >>randy >> >>* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy >> * _______________________________________________ >>sig-policy mailing list >>sig-policy@lists.apnic.net >>http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * > _______________________________________________ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy >
