[sig-nir] Re: [sig-policy] Introduction of Proposal at NIR SIG:"Abolishi

  • To: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
  • Subject: [sig-nir] Re: [sig-policy] Introduction of Proposal at NIR SIG:"Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs"
  • From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
  • Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:47:32 +0900 (JST)
  • Cc: sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: <20050404.143723.68536392.izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
  • List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-nir>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: "APNIC SIG for National Internet Registries \(NIRs\)"<sig-nir.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-nir@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>,<mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>,<mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • References: <20050404.143723.68536392.izumi@nic.ad.jp>
    • 
      This is Izumi again.
      
      I realised that I have introduced the wrong e-mail address for NIR SIG
      ML.
      
      > Please join us in the discussions at "sig-nir-chair at apnic dot net".
      "sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net" is the correct mailing list.
      
      An apology for the confusion.
      
      Best Regards,
      Izumi
      
      From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
      Subject: [sig-policy] Introduction of Proposal at NIR SIG: "Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs"
      Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:37:23 +0900 (JST)
      
      > Dear Policy SIG Colleagues,
      > 
      > 
      > I would like to introduce a proposal at NIR SIG which proposes a
      > change in the APNIC fee scheme for NIRs.
      > 
      >   "Proposal : "Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs" "
      >    http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-nir/archive/2005/03/msg00002.html
      > 
      > Since its impact on APNIC budget must be considered by APNIC
      > membership as a whole, comments are very much welcome from non-NIRs
      > members of the community as well as NIRs.
      > 
      > Please join us in the discussions at "sig-nir-chair at apnic dot net".
      > 
      > You will be able to subscribe or view archives from:
      >     http://www.apnic.net/community/lists/index.html
      > 
      > 
      > Best Regards,
      > Izumi Okutani
      > NIR SIG Chair
      > 
      > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >     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-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
      > _______________________________________________
      > sig-policy mailing list
      > sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
      > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
      > 
      >