[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [sig-nir] Proposal_Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs
Dear Billy, and all,
JPNIC supports this proposal as a possible solution for the current
problem of NIR per address fee scheme without serious impact on APNIC
budget, I believe.
Thanks and best regards,
Toshi
--
Toshiyuki Hosaka
Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC)
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:59:29 +0900 (JST)
Izumi Okutani <izumi@nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> Dear Billy,
>
>
> Thank you for submitting a proposal on a revision of the fee scheme
> for NIRs.
>
> This issue will concern APNIC membership as a whole, so comments are
> welcome from NIRs as well as from other APNIC members and the APNIC
> secretariat.
>
>
> Regards,
> Izumi
> NIR SIG Chair
>
> From: "MH Billy Cheon" <cmh@nic.or.kr>
> Subject: [sig-nir] Proposal_Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs
> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:44:49 +0900
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Please ignore the previous mail. I think I made a mistake.
> > This is the final version.
> >
> > Sorry for causing confusion :-)
> >
> > Billy
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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-nir mailing list
> sig-nir@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir
>
--
Toshiyuki Hosaka <hosaka@nic.ad.jp>
