Re: [sig-nir] Forming WG to discuss about NIR Fee
- To: MAEMURA Akinori <maem at maem dot org>
- Subject: Re: [sig-nir] Forming WG to discuss about NIR Fee
- From: David Chen <david at twnic dot net dot tw>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:08:09 +0800
- Cc: sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
- In-reply-to: <200410061412.ICG36582.NBFN@maem.org>
- List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-nir>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=help>
- List-id: "APNIC SIG for National Internet Registries \(NIRs\)"<sig-nir.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>,<mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>,<mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <200410061412.ICG36582.NBFN@maem.org>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
Thanks MAEMURA for your well consideration. For the suggestion, I support to form a closed WG, and the WG is comprised all NIRs and APNIC. Should NIRs nominate the participants?
MAEMURA Akinori wrote:
Regarding the NIR Fee, JPNIC IP Department has just had a brief discussion.
One of the way to look for a reasonable fee schedule is raising some example schedules and/or models and then applying current facts to verify if it is reasonable.
We notice that for verification we need all figures from
per address fee amount, number of members and total address
space of all NIRs'. but they are of course not disclosed.
I think in this case we should form a *closed* working group
which contains all NIRs and APNIC Secretariat to share such
If you agree on this idea;
APNIC Secretariat, could you prepare a mailing list for this WG?
please advise who will join this discussion
If you don't agree please let us have your comment and idea.
sig-nir mailing list
sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net