CARVIEW

MOTORHOMES

Select Language

HTTP/2 200 date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 12:58:55 GMT content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 cf-ray: 95f131bb8d6be9c3-BLR cf-cache-status: DYNAMIC last-modified: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 05:28:25 GMT vary: Accept-Encoding x-content-type-options: nosniff strict-transport-security: max-age=15552000; preload server: cloudflare content-encoding: gzip [sig-nir] Re: [sig-policy] Introduction of Proposal at NIR SIG:"Abolishi

[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: <https://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: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>,<mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://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" "
>    https://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:
>     https://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]
>      https://www.arin.net/registration/fee_schedule.html#ipv6_alloc
> 
>     [LACNIC IPv6 Fee Schdule]
>      https://lacnic.net/en/registro/table.html
> 
>     [APNIC Fee Schedule]
>      https://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
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> 
>

Original Source | Taken Source