• Date Prev
• Date Next
• Thread Prev
• Thread Next
• Date Index
• Thread Index

Re: [apnic-talk] [SPAM]Re: [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR -

• To: "MRMuthuswami " <mrmuthuswami at rediffmail dot com>, "apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net" <apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net>
• Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] [SPAM]Re: [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments
• From: Desi Valli <desi.v at net4 dot in>
• Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:39:39 +0530
• Accept-language: en-US
• Acceptlanguage: en-US
• Delivered-to: apnic-talk at mailman dot apnic dot net
• In-reply-to: <1258826925.S.31828.45804.f6mail-144-155.rediffmail.com.old.1258870947.1468 at webmail dot rediffmail dot com>
• List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk>
• List-help: <mailto:apnic-talk-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
• List-id: General discussions on APNIC <apnic-talk.lists.apnic.net>
• List-post: <mailto:apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net>
• List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk>, <mailto:apnic-talk-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
• List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk>, <mailto:apnic-talk-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
• References: <1258826925.S.31828.45804.f6mail-144-155.rediffmail.com.old.1258870947.1468@webmail.rediffmail.com>
• Thread-index: AcprPa5lsncxtZcLQeOavGV0oR951gA1YbMA
• Thread-topic: [SPAM]Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments

Dear Mr. Muthuswami,   I appreciate your support. At the same time, let’s not take this discussion from a nationalism perspective. Let’s keep it logical and just fulfil the criteria to form a NIR. Beyond that, I don’t think we need to justify anything.   As per APNIC, they just expect public comments on the application. That interprets the fact that we may sit and ignore all these comments. However, the reasons for response to clarify all professional enquiries that members may carry in their mind. Beyond that we prefer to ignore and let it be just a public comment to APNIC on the application.:-)   I thank once again for your support.   Regards Desi Valli   From: apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [mailto:apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of MRMuthuswami Sent: 22 November 2009 11:52 To: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net Subject: [SPAM]Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments   This is exactly what a White man did to us 100s of years ago - divide and rule! Going through your discussions, makes me feel history is repeating. I call upon all the Indians to publicly support establishing NIR in India. When China, Japan Korea and others have NIR for various reasons, why not India? I urge all Indians on this list to excerise patriotism towards their motherland and avoid public nuisance. Any discussions regarding the purpose and cause of NIR in India should be dicsussed internally and NIXI should facilitate this by forming an internel mailing list or a discussion group. Members who wish to move from APNIC to India NIR can discuss and agree on these. Once the NIR is established, all members must move to NIR to support its cause and purspose. My organisation is been a member of APNIC and I can confirm that APNIC is NOT providing support to us when required. Sometimes my staff and customers get frustrated with the waiting time. APNIC working hours do not meet our local requirments. APNIC is and will be an Australian company with Australian Management. Take a look at APNIC management, the desicion makers, just one from an Asian background http://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/meet-the-team. How is APNIC an  Asia Pacific company when for the last 15 years its under Australian management meeting the needs and requirements of the members from its own country. And more over, there is no one on the EC that truely represents the memberships of India or subcontinent leave alone understanding our issues. When the EC changes every two years why not the key management personnel change too? I'm sure we all can benefit from NIR in India - volume discount and with surplus funds from NIXI, we will be in a better situation to organise our own trainings to suite our requirements. Nevertheless, I once again urge all Indians to execise patriotism towads your motherland and don't let a white man rule us again. We are a nation with over a 1.5 billion population. We can resolve our internal issues internally in a democratic process. -Muthuswami Iyer >Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:45:05 +0530 >From: Vebtel - Kusumba S <kusumba at vebtel dot com> >Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - >Call for Comments >To: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net >Message-ID: <4B082019.2030403 at vebtel dot com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >Read thru complete mail and did not find still what probably community >needs to understand at this moment. Please don't get us wrong! There is >a disconnect in between "purpose" and "cause" here and it is important >that the "purpose" is agreeable to the community to allow the "cause". >All one is trying to understand here is that "purpose". > >Comments Inserted below. > >Desi Valli wrote: >> >> I'm personally happy to get this many enquiries coming from different >> sections of the Internet community. Since most of enquiries are >> answered, that too logically and relevantly, I'm confident that there >> will be no reasons left to say no NIR. >> >Kusumba S >>> No individual or group of people takes decisions in an >open policy framework! I must stress that we are not referring here to >"closed-open policy framework" but are really referring to "open policy >framework". Saying "yes" or "no" is not something that either few >members, EC or community alone decides. >> >> >> >> Financial benefit (for whom...for NIXI / INNIC or for Members!), >> >> Of course for the members. >> >Kusumba S >>> So, here is the assumption. Indian NIR will be formed with >lot of cash credit in the account (as is the case.....that will be from >NIXI) and the same will be used to obtain IP resources from APNIC and >assign the same to the members either free or discounted over by 80% >atleast! Alright, if thats the case, I do see benefit for members too! >Infact, this will open up huge opportunity in India for lot of companies >to come and establish networks in India. >> >> >> >> better control (on ISPs or resources or members ??), better >> utilisation (of....?) >> >> On resources. >> >Kusumba S >>> This is what exactly community does not want! Its the >obligation of the member to have self-control on the IP resources and >update the usage through assignment window. If APNIC during its >evaluation finds that the member has under-utilized or not used the >resources at all, it can always recall the resources. Such mechanism is >already in place. Irrespective of the resources being assigned by APNIC >or NIR, its APNIC who can always recall the resources. There are several >policy proposals that are being discussed on the matter more closer to >the effective usage of the resources. >> >> >> >> better utilisation (of....?) >> >> Of resources. >> >Kusumba S >>> How ? If all the IP resources can ONLY be better utilized >if assigned through NIRs, then APNIC should seriously consider allowing >all the member countries to form their own NIRs immediately! >> >> >> >> productivity (irrelevant), >> >> When we discuss about any resources be it human, infrastructure, >> virtual resources, productivity is very much relevant. A system cannot >> provide a sustainable output if productivity of the system is made >> relevant. >> >Kusumba S >>> Irrelevant. >> >> >> >> infrastructure, training, etc are the tag words that do not appear in >> the tag cloud of NIR anywhere >> >> Those were answers to enquiries of the community members. >> >Kusumba S >>> Honestly, there was no single answer that demonstrated >either the need for NIR, capability to run NIR and effectiveness of NIR! >> >> >> >> known several ISPs that have been given more than /27 allocation by >> upstream >> >> True, but it is also true that India is one of those countries that >> run most of their Internet network over NAT. That's because of >> insufficient IP addresses, under utilisation of IP addresses by others >> who have more, and the cost of IP addresses. >> >Kusumba S >>> No one stopped ISPs to run their networks on Public IP >addresses. Three largest ISPs in India have been providing broadband for >over a decade now, strictly on public IP addresses. I know atleast two >Cat-B (that operates within a state) ISPs who have been allocated /15s >recently despite that they already have /16. All these new allocations >are being used for broadband services. Just because Internet bandwidth >was expensive, ISPs never stopped offering Internet services, so is with >IP addresses. > >Which came first? NAT or IP address? If IP address was available then >itself, why did one adopt NAT? Was it for reducing costs in order >compete with incumbent? > >I never heard a situation where APNIC rejected allocation request as >long as the same is substantially justified. Ofcourse, one has justified >to obtain resources and ended up never using those resources. The other >way of the question is, how many filed second-opinion requests and >followed the same... It will be none (only if anyone filed >second-opinion requests). >> >> >> >> 6-7% speak English...! So does ISPs have routers, switches, servers >> that talk Hindi! >> >> India has 22 official languages, English is one of the languages. >> (more information on Indian languages are available here >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India ). Indian higher >> professional education system is mostly made of English, especially >> Engineering & Medicine. For ISPs to make router work, they need >> engineers who could be understanding only the basic English or of >> those who developed their skills in English at their later stages. For >> example, even though I studied my engineering in English, till the age >> of 22 I never ever tried speaking a single sentence in English. But I >> cultivated my skills in my later part of my life. But is the Internet >> community made of only engineers or only those who speak English? >> Isn't it important that we make the users as part of the stake holder >> community? Are they not part of the eco-system? Then why ICANN >> approves IDN in the recent conference? Isn't it important that we make >> the non English speaking Indians part of Internet? Many small steps >> are taken towards this. Now we can continue to debate on whether this >> is really relevant or not in the context of NIR? But for many it is >> relevant. >> >Kusumba S >>> I was curious to understand this aspect. Here is what I >did to find out if engineers are the ones who manage the resources for >their account on APNIC. The whois search displayed that the top five >allocations of India has either the admin-c or tech-c or both updated >years ago and all of them were the senior ranks in that respective >companies! Also, those contacts factually does not exist at this moment >in that organisation. So, even though well educated persons were admin-c >and tech-c for the account, they still failed to update the records as >needed and as agreed in the agreement signed during the initial allocation. > >The other part of the question is something like asking if only Pilots >can fly an aeroplane! I guess, community knows the answer! >> >> >> >> PS: As part of my interests and knowing the ground reality of a common >> man in Kanyakumari (a small town where I was bornJ), I'm working on >> few Internet gadgets that are of local languages. Will be introduced >> to common man sooner. >> >Kusumba S >>> Good to know this and we would be happy to know about >these devices, but all you may understand is that the IP addresses are >still not available in local language. They constitute of numbers from 1 >to 0. :-( >> >> >> >> never seen APNIC corresponding in Hindi... so how did these many >> members obtain resources already corresponding in English? >> >> The above answer may be relevant to this question too. >> >Kusumba S >>> No .. it is not relevant. >> >> >> >> On a lighter note, I don't think APNIC has the capability to handle >> 1,190 million peopleJ. Hence India made around 90million people who >> could speak a common language that APNIC knows. But still it is 4 ? >> times more than the Australian population, where APNIC is operating from. >> >Kusumba S >>> Great, on the lighter side, this clarifies that local >support is actually not needed since there are 90 million people to >manage about 490 APNIC accounts of India. Other alternative is that the >member community of India can make a policy proposal that APNIC should >host a team of Hindi speaking host masters and the policy can be voted >in favour of the proposal since Indian membership has close to 3000 >votes to make or break a policy. Hey, but that will be the last policy >that gets voted in favour of the proposal since Indian vote bank will >reduce significantly once the NIR is formed and as the members start >moving towards NIR membership. > >Look at this: India forms NIR. Looses vote bank! APNIC either because of >a Policy proposal or by power of the EC decides to increase the PAF >considering the financial condition of APNIC, India cannot vote against >that policy or decision since there will not be so many votes then! >Strange situation but thats what I think one calls as "Catch22". >> >> >> >> Of course, when one asks, APNIC did extend local support to many members. >> There is no denial to this. We appreciate all that what APNIC extended >> as local support. Further LOCAL support should be extended by forming NIR. >> >Kusumba S >>> So APNIC is already doing this! Hence, this reason cannot >be adjudicated to reason for NIR. >> >> >> >> If NIR is formed in India, will IP addresses be given free to >> encourage the ISPs? >> >> May be a short term strategy to encourage ISPs. Like in Penetration >> price model in marketing theories. This enables an opportunity to >> reduce the NATing and improve the status of information required for >> security officials. However it is a decision of post NIR formation and >> its operational models. >> >Kusumba S >>> Wow! so as I assumed, it is proving to be a fact that >Indian NIR will be cash rich when it starts its operations and offer >Free IP addresses to members! This will be fantastic and I am sure no >NIR has ever done this! >> >> >> >> If NIR is formed in India, will the trainings be given free without >> associating with SANOG, APNIC, etc or inviting a speaker from abroad? >> No, we shouldn't be and cannot be doing that. Information and >> knowledge are supposed to cross between borders. We should continue to >> associate with all other Internet bodies that contribute in the >> proliferation. The formation of NIR is like creating a branch >> operation for better manageability and creating regional strategies. >> When organisation grows, we make regional presence. It's just similar >> to that. Internet is one world with no patriotism. I personally love >> this world. The expectation of creation of NIR is to have it operated >> from a regional perspective, fulfilling and solving regional needs & >> problems, that's all. >> >Kusumba S >>> Again, "need" and "problems" are totally irrelevant from >the context of NIR. It is strongly objectionable in an open policy frame >work that a policy allowance be considered as solution for a regional >problem! If that is the way, every country will have its own problems >and the solutions for that cannot be found in global policies impacting >global scenario. >> >> >> >> What if tomorrow, NIR in India mandates issue of IP resources against >> irrelevant compliances of various licensing procedures in India? Is >> Indian community ready for that? < >> examples in the past!>> >> I didn't understand this properly. However based on my understanding, >> I can say that many policies and compliances that are relevant to >> myself may not be relevant to another person. Compliances/policies are >> not written on stone. They get modified according to the needs. Many >> of the irrelevant economic policies of India is criticised by many >> including myself. But sometimes the same is praised also. See the link >> below for reference. >> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/02/business/worldbusiness/02rupee.html >> >Kusumba S >>> I am atleast aware of the list of items that the >representative bodies of Internet in India have been debating with >policy makers and many of which did not go through or will ever go >through! So, a single policy that was praised does not aggregate to a >general situation. Further, I reiterate, NIR in any country must be >independent of any Policy makers, Compliance authorities, Control >agencies, Managing companies, Stake holding authorities, etc. It is very >very important to demonstrate that neutrality for the community get >convinced of this. All other reasons does not really attribute to >anything of NIR or no NIR situation. >> >> >> >> Can someone demonstrate the capability of running NIR operations? >> >> Other than the demonstration of capabilities through documentational >> proofs, is there any demonstration procedure written in MOA or policy >> documents of APNIC in creation of NIRs? If so, please let it be >> informed in detail. Such demostrations can also be performed, the >> applicant is prepared. >> >Kusumba S >>> Where is the applicant? Is he here... I was under >assumption that the messages on this mailing list were being posted by >member who is not representing the applicant! Yes, ofcourse, APNIC with >the power vested with EC, as I know, can always ask for such information >/ demonstration since the same has significant impact on the region. >> >> >> >> Can Indian community decide the policies by establishing open-policy >> framework or does some at NIXI or DoT or Some other agency decides them? >> >> Internet policy is never decided by any government bodies or >> authorities. DOT decides the Internet Service Provider licensing >> conditions and not the policies of Internet. Applicable to NIXI too. >> Technical, procedural and price models are recommended and formulated >> by the experts in the industry. So, this can be confirmed that all >> stakeholders of Indian Internet community will be responsible for the >> decisions of policies, and will have a definte framework. I was one of >> the core team members in 2002-03 when NIXI was formed, and I can >> assure that there was no intervention from any of these authorites in >> policies. However, since the initial funding was done by the GoI, >> which is of tax payers money they are made part of the supervisory >> committie. After all, department of commerce freed ICANN only >> recently. Such movements could be expected in terms of operations too >> at a later stage on NIXI. >> >Kusumba S >>> I din't see atleast in the last one decade a single policy >was ever decided by non-government body! Ofcourse, the discussion was >only about "open-policy" and not "conditions". There is a wrong >understanding of the "open-policy framework" itself here. "Experts" are >not part of open-policy! Its only the subscribing members or >participating members or members who have common interest are part of >open-policy and have required voting powers to adopt or put-down any >policy. All the policy matters, no matter what the size is, should and >must be put in the open community framework for required voting and must >seek voting and achieve majority for the policy / proposal to be >implemented. A group of representatives, as a matter of fact including >just the Board, taking a decision on any matter is not considered as >open-policy framework. > >< >records and we know what happened including why a CEO of NIXI has >resigned only when the resignation letter was made public! Did any >member representative was the head of NIXI after that? Is it manned and >managed by member community? Honestly, this is irrelevant here and >deviates the subject matter.>> >> >> >> >> What will be the composition of the stake holders? Is that part of the >> Memorandum of Association and Articles of the proposed establishment / >> company / organisation? >> As we all know, like in any organisation the composition of stake >> holders will be of the participating members. India is the largest >> democracy in the world. We believe in this system, hence democratic >> approaches as recommended through the companies act of India will be >> followed among the member communities. >> >Kusumba S >>> There is a difference between "stake holders" and >"participating members". Members need not be stake holders or >participating members or both! Ofcourse, yes, it would be interesting to >know the open-frame policy / procedures that would be adopted by Indian >NIR and the same can be published in the interest of the community and >the effectiveness of such NIR, if formed. Composition of the board, >election procedures, voting rights, policy framework, decision power, >holding patterns, etc are something that will demonstrate that the NIR >in India is not suffered by either policy or licensing stake holders. > >> >> >> Who runs or heads NIR in India? Someone from ISP community? >> Government? Neutral entity? >> >> I think the above answer suffice for this too. >> >Kusumba S >>> No, the above answer did not answer this. >> >> >> >> The answer on financial implications of APNIC can be answered by such >> responsible people, please. >> >> >> >> IP address resources are community owned and must remain community own >> by all means! They cannot be perceived as "control-infrastructure" or >> "problem-resolving-infrastructure". >> Completely agree on the first statement. However, on the second >> statement I partially differ. IP is the controlling infrastcture of >> Internet. IP standards control the existance of Internet. Also it is >> the problem-resolving-infrastructure. IPv6 is a problem resolving >> infrastructure to resolve the problems of insuffeciency in IPv4 >> resources. IP resolves many human problems by converging all means of >> communicaitons. Hence it is very much practical to see IP as control >> or problem resolving infrastructure. I may be seeing IP as in holistic >> view of Internet, some others may say it just as few numbers. But it >> is an important problem-resolving-infrastructure. >> >Kusumba S >>> I am very disappointed to know that the very perception of >"control" having hold on the allocation rights itself is too dangerous >for the community! Further, the problems that have been showcased in >this thread are different than the problems being mentioned above. > >IPv6, good to know its existence to avoid the death! How many networks >in India have adopted IPv6? I am sure the routes are talking about this >loud! >> >> >> >> Even Gandhi was not a great man in the views of Nathuram Godse. Every >> one has their own views and perception on anything and everything. >> However what I would prefer to understand about the views and >> perceptions of other member community is to get more valid points on >> why this shouldn't be done if any, instead of only questioning the >> purpose and capabilities. But still more enquiries are welcome so that >> all doubts on the capabilities and purpose could be clarified. >> >Kusumba S >>> Yes, > >1) it has significant impact on APNIC and its sustenance / finances, >hence, THE SAME MAY IMPACT IN INCREASE OF FEE ACROSS THE REGION ITSELF >BY MULTIPLE TIMES! >2) community does not want to allow "control" of IP resources by anyone, >hence, need clarity >3) community want to be assured by showcasing the policy / procedures in >place and adopted that the resource management is effective and member >contributed >4) community is equally concerned with the capability too and that >cannot be ruled-out, (especially after this mail thread in my case!) >5) community wants to be assured that the member is free to obtain the >resources irrespective of any regional conditions / situations / >compliances (all the three are important) > >depending on what is showcased, there may be few other things that one >may want to understand. >> >> >> >> In case if members are not convinced on the responses, instead of >> merely rejecting with feedbacks like irrelevant, I prefer the >> communications to be more of 5Ws (What, why, when, who, where) and >> 1H(How). Unless we are able to measure, we can not manage. Please make >> your questions in that perspective. >> >Kusumba S >>> > >_What_ is Indian NIR all about? Its composition, policy frame work, >procedures, relevance, stake holders, voting rights, non-member >participations, etc >_Why_ is that India need to form NIR now when the same has significant >impact on the region itself? >_When_ APNIC can demonstrate that the IP resources are already being >managed effectively and that the support required by members is >effectively delivered, how the reason of local "problems" be attributed >to form NIR in India? >_Who_ are the stake holders in terms of decisions, policies, procedures, >functioning, etc and if such procedures have been already put in the >public domain for comments / adoption? >_Where_ will be Indian NIR hosted administratively and functionally? >Will NIXI manage / man it? Will member community representative by >election process be elected as CEO / Director or Board member? > >Ofcourse, for all the above, "_How_" is that the same can be demonstrated? > >I guess, the "*requests"* are more in relevance to what is expected. > >Greetings, > >*Kusumba S* >> >> >> >> Hoping to get more questions. >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> Desi Valli >> >> >> >> *From:* apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net >> [mailto:apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] *On Behalf Of *Vebtel - >> Kusumba S >> *Sent:* 21 November 2009 16:21 >> *To:* Philip Smith >> *Cc:* apnic-talk at apnic dot net >> *Subject:* Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR >> - Call for Comments >> >> >> >> Dear Philip / Gentlemen, >> >> Philip --> Your comments on all the three mails you sent are apt. >> >> Leave apart NIR or no NIR in India, I am certain, the community cannot >> allow one to think NIR as "problem-solving" system for various >> non-relevant "domestic" problems, that ofcourse have no relevance to NIR. >> >> Financial benefit (for whom...for NIXI / INNIC or for Members!), >> better control (on ISPs or resources or members ??), better >> utilisation (of....?), productivity (irrelevant), infrastructure, >> training, etc are the tag words that do not appear in the tag cloud of >> NIR anywhere. I have known several ISPs that have been given more than >> /27 allocation by upstream. >> >> 6-7% speak English...! So does ISPs have routers, switches, servers >> that talk Hindi! India membership is one of the largest membership >> with APNIC.. I have never seen APNIC corresponding in Hindi... so how >> did these many members obtain resources already corresponding in >> English? Ofcourse, when one asks, APNIC did extend local support to >> many members. >> >> If financial benefit is what is looked at, I am sure every one >> understands that membership fee at APNIC is derived from Policy >> proposals and member voting... (Ofcourse, EC decision prevails) so, >> when India is the largest membership, it can float a policy, convince >> the community and get the same voted in favour! Even if 70% of the >> votes in India are exercised, it can make or break any policy! For >> that matter, any policy or to achieve anything from the above tag >> cloud, 70% of Indian members voting is enough. Approximately, India >> has 3000+ votes. >> >> Some question that possibly, if deemed were the solutions; do not get >> answered anywhere: >> >> If NIR is formed in India, will IP addresses be given free to >> encourage the ISPs? >> >> If NIR is formed in India, will the trainings be given free without >> associating with SANOG, APNIC, etc or inviting a speaker from abroad? >> >> That apart, >> >> What if tomorrow, NIR in India mandates issue of IP resources against >> irrelevant compliances of various licensing procedures in India? Is >> Indian community ready for that? < >> examples in the past!>> >> >> Can some one demonstrate the capability of running NIR operations? >> (when we know that basic obligations such as assignment windows have >> not been filled by many!, leave apart contacts that never get updated >> on APNIC - JK1448-AP, SN200-AP and ND41-AP are shown as "contacts" for >> MAINT-IN-NIXI even today that were last updated 09/Dec/2005) >> >> Can Indian community decide the policies by establishing open-policy >> framework or does some at NIXI or DoT or Some other agency decides them? >> >> What will be the composition of the stake holders? Is that part of the >> Memorandum of Association and Articles of the proposed establishment / >> company / organisation? >> >> Who runs or heads NIR in India? Some one from ISP community? >> Government? Neutral entity? >> >> APNIC may let community know if such information is already available >> with them that may have been provided during the application. >> >> Beyond all those that are to be answered, can APNIC let the community >> know the financial implications of NIR in India since Indian >> membership contributes significantly to APNIC finances. Any >> projections for next 3 years if even 70% of the Indian membership >> moves to NIR in India in the next two years? >> >> I strongly feel that the purpose of NIR has not been fully understood >> unless someone has looked it at as a problem-solving solution for >> domestic problems. IP address resources are community owned and must >> remain community own by all means! They cannot be perceived as >> "control-infrastructure" or "problem-resolving-infrastructure". >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> *Kusumba S* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Philip Smith wrote: >> >> Hi Desi, >> >> Desi Valli said the following on 20/11/09 18:17 : >> >> >> Cisco goes even to the level of 85% discount from their >> >> GLP. Impossible to listen to those numbers in westerns countries. >> >> >> >> >> Do you have any references for this? >> >> Do other vendors do the same thing? >> >> >> >> _Regarding Cross funding between IX/NIR_ >> >> >> >> NIXI is a NPO and it is mandated that the organisation cannot carry >> >> profits. That implies the fact that the surplus should be better >> >> utilised. >> >> >> >> >> If there is a surplus, it suggests that NIXI is making too much money. >> Why not reduce the prices instead, given that 'Indianisation' is so >> important? >> >> >> >> I disagree to the suggestion that things are to be separated. Internet >> >> is a field of convergence. No technology other than IP has enabled >> >> convergence in all possible areas thus improving productivity and >> >> optimal utilisation of resources & infrastructures. Suggesting to have >> >> independent operations, funding & resources of IX, registry and NIR, >> >> defeats many very purposes of Internet itself. >> >> >> >> >> Internet also abhors single points of failure. ;-) >> >> >> >> _Regarding the benefits for the Indian Internet Eco-system_ >> >> >> >> 1. Financial benefits. >> >> >> >> 2. Better control, hence better utilisation. >> >> >> >> >> What will be controlled? >> >> >> >> 3. Better utilisation, hence better productivity. >> >> >> >> 4. Better productivity, hence better cost. >> >> >> >> 5. Thus creating a cyclic effort over the financial benefits. >> >> >> >> Over and above: >> >> >> >> 1. ITU lets individual countries to manage their numbering system >> >> >> >> >> Do we want to replicate the "old world" telephony system management >> processes for the Internet? >> >> The Internet has grown by international cooperation. The RIRs manage the >> distribution of address space. APNIC's existing NIRs participate in this >> distribution process. The RIRs don't give /8s to each country and tell >> them to get on with it. >> >> >> >> 2. ICANN lets individual countries to manage their ccTLDs. >> >> >> >> >> Organisations responsible for managing ccTLDs have done so long before >> ICANN existed. The process is not top down as I think you are implying. >> >> >> >> 3. Then what is illogical in NIR? >> >> >> >> >> I worry that there is a misunderstanding in what I've read so far as to >> what function an NIR is actually meant to perform. >> >> Hopefully you can clarify. :-) >> >> philip >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> apnic-talk mailing list >> apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net <mailto:apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net> >> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Message sent using India's leading Hosted Microsoft Exchange service. >> For details visit http://net4.in/hostedExchange >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Please consider the environment before printing. >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/attachments/20091121/075f0a79/attachment.html > >------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >apnic-talk mailing list >apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk > > >End of apnic-talk Digest, Vol 67, Issue 15 >****************************************** > Message sent using India’s leading Hosted Microsoft Exchange service. For details visit http://net4.in/hostedExchange Please consider the environment before printing. Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next Date Index Thread Index Prev by Date: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments Next by Date: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for comments ( Andy Linton) Previous by thread: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments Next by thread: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments Index(es): Date Thread