I am confused, not by you including the various registry nor your observation of divergence in the opinions of 6 people. My confusion comes from the idea that a _new_ summary report with a graph is _easier_ and thus cheaper than extending and therefore completing the current stats already in place.

Now I am certainly not an uber-expert in databases, but to calculate a summary to produce a graph wouldn't the intermediate step be to get the records from the APNIC registry database by a SELECT in the first place? Wouldn't that be cheaper and easier to do _just_ that? i.e Just dump the data out in the already used format and let those who are interested in producing pretty graphs do so?

I really didn't expect this to be such a hard request for a registry. And I certainly didn't expect the noise this has generated. I understand that my desires may not be shared - but I consider this to be a basic (very basic) requirement of a registry. Maybe I'm wrong.

I also realise that APNIC members are very concerned about the costs of APNIC and the relative spending priorities. So since this does seem to be a request from me primarily I am more than willing to _donate_ my time to help the registry do this to reduce engineering costs and effort.

Terry

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Sanjaya <sanjaya@apnic.net> wrote:

Thanks Leo for your info on various registry.

To all, the various registry information will be included in the
calculation.

I'm noting divergence in the desired level of detail.

The detailed report is needed for transparency and research purposes (2
people)

Of those who don't want detailed report (4 people), 3 are concerned with
APNIC spending its limited resource producing the report. One saw the
risk of misuse.

I propose to produce a summarised daily public report first (with
graph). We will look for a minimum effort and secure way to fulfill the
research needs, but this comes later. Let me know how you feel about
this approach. Thanks.