Re: [sig-nir] Re: VNNIC's Position about IPv6 Fee Abolishing Proposal

  • To: Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: Re: [sig-nir] Re: VNNIC's Position about IPv6 Fee Abolishing Proposal
  • From: David Chen <david at twnic dot net dot tw>
  • Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:00:00 +0800
  • Cc: sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net, Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
  • In-reply-to: <42DDF2A3.20201 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: <006b01c58c18$d2923c70$22a5fea9@Billy> <003101c58c39$ca1622c0$340977cb@Nhung> <42DDDD7A.9010904@nic.ad.jp> <0D294571587F2F53BEC60211@[192.168.1.102]> <42DDF2A3.20201@nic.ad.jp>
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
    • 
      This is David Chen from TWNIC. May I have a question about the discount
      rule?
      
      My question is, if one existing IPv6 initial allocation space holder
      wants to implement the prop-021-v001 policy to expand IPv6 allocation
      space which is more than /32, can the subsequent allocation address
      space be applied the 90% discount by using their IPv4 infrastructure?
      Could you please clarify this for us, thank you very much!
      
      Best Regards,
      
      David
      
      
      Izumi Okutani wrote:
      
      >Thank you for the explanation Paul.
      >Any comments or questions on this?
      >
      >Izumi
      >
      >Paul Wilson wrote:
      >  
      >
      >>Dear all,
      >>
      >>Firstly, let's be clear that the discount applies to fees for the
      >>allocation of IPv6 address space to existing IPv4 infrastructure.  It
      >>does not apply to allocations of IPv6 space to new networks, nor to
      >>subsequent allocations of IPv6 space to networks that have already
      >>transitioned to IPv6.  I hope that this is clear in all documentation
      >>related to this policy, including the revised fee structure that was
      >>recently published.
      >>
      >>The rationale for this discount is that the allocation of IPv6 to
      >>existing IPv4 infrastructure is intended to be a lightweight process,
      >>relying on the fact that the network infrastructure has already been
      >>assessed and IPv4 address space allocated.  In other words the "work"
      >>has been done already in the previous IPv4 application, and it is not
      >>justified to charge the same fees for an allocation of (IPv6) addresses
      >>to that same infrastructure.
      >>
      >>The APNIC EC did initially discuss a 100% fee discount for these cases,
      >>but felt on consideration that since some administrative activities are
      >>involved in making these allocations, some fee payment is justified.
      >>
      >>I hope that this explanation helps, but please let me know if any other
      >>issues are not clear.
      >>
      >>Best regards, and I look forward to seeing you all in Hanoi,
      >>
      >>Paul.
      >>
      >>--On Wednesday, 20 July 2005 2:13 PM +0900 Izumi Okutani
      >><izumi at nic dot ad dot jp> wrote:
      >>
      >>    
      >>
      >>>Thanks to NIRs for expressing your comments. I think we should keep this
      >>>proposal("prop-028-v001:Abolishing IPv6 per address fee for NIRs")
      >>>active as most NIRs wish to continue discussions on this issue.
      >>>
      >>>Now that APNIC has implemented the 90% discount on the per address fee,
      >>>I believe the situation has changed since it was initially proposed.
      >>>Just to start off the discussions, I would like to ask some questions to
      >>>both NIRs and APNIC.
      >>>
      >>>It seems that 90% is almost as good as free, so would someone from the
      >>>NIRs share with us why you wish the per address fee to be totally
      >>>abolished instead of the discount?
      >>>
      >>>I'd also like to ask the reverse question to APNIC. Was there any reason
      >>>why APNIC has made the decision to provide the discount instead of
      >>>totally abolishing the fee as proposed by the NIRs? It would also be
      >>>helpful if APNIC could explain the logic behind the fee change so that
      >>>we can compare it with what has been proposed by the NIRs.
      >>>
      >>>Any other imputs from non-NIRs/APNIC are also very welcome. Any thoughts
      >>>on the APNIC fee change or NIR proposal?
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>Izumi
      >>>
      >>>Phan Thi Nhung wrote:
      >>>
      >>>      
      >>>
      >>>>Dear Billy,
      >>>>I'm sorry for the delay answer. After talking within VNNIC Hostmaster
      >>>>Team, we agree to keep this proposal active and discuss at the NIR SIG
      >>>>at the APNIC 20. See you all in Ha Noi.
      >>>>Regards.
      >>>>Nhung.
      >>>>        
      >>>>
      >>>_______________________________________________
      >>>sig-nir mailing list
      >>>sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
      >>>http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir
      >>>      
      >>>
      >>
      >>
      >>________________________________________________________________________
      >>Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic dot net>
      >>http://www.apnic.net                            ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
      >>------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >>See you at APNIC 20!                        Hanoi, Vietnam, 6-9 Sep 2005
      >>                                          http://www.apnic.net/meetings
      >>
      >>
      >>    
      >>
      >
      >
      >_______________________________________________
      >sig-nir mailing list
      >sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
      >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir
      >
      >  
      >