[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Wg-apnic-fees] APNIC membership fee structure proposal
Dear Paul and APNIC members,
Thank you for your reply.
I think APNIC should collect Fee from the organization of a historical allocation, too.
It corrects an unfair feeling and the return is promoted, it might be good.
Of course, it is sure to become an income increase for APNIC.
Please let me know your idea.
Best regards,
--
akai
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Wilson [mailto:pwilson@apnic.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 9:42 AM
> To: 赤井 卓(ネットワーク本部); wg-apnic-fees@apnic.net
> Subject: RE: [Wg-apnic-fees] APNIC membership fee structure proposal
>
> Dear Akai,
>
> > However, I don't know how an revenue increase of 10-15%
> will be used.
> > I cannot explain New fee structure (include unknown New
> Activity) to our
> > company,
>
> The point I have made is that the proposed revenue increase
> is important
> for the maintenance of *existing* APNIC activities, which are
> currently
> operating on a balanced budget. Future service increases
> such as resource
> certification, along with unforseen events, could certainly
> undermine the
> current stability of APNIC services under these circumstances.
>
> ># Do you explain to our president, Masayoshi Son? :-P
>
> I would be happy to discuss with Son san the market value of
> the address
> space that your company has received in recent years, however
> I am sure
> that he is already well aware of that. :-)
>
>
> > I collected RIR's annual membership fee.
> > (I cannot find RIPE/NCC tier/Size table)
> > Current APNIC fee is similar other RIR until /10.
> > But proposal fee structure is greatly quite different from those.
> >
> > If this proposal is approved, the IP fee rises terribly in
> the AP region.
> > What is the reason why the charge jumps up in the so much?
> > What is the reason why only APNIC and other RIR are different?
>
> Please refer to page 5 of the proposal document, which is
> available on the
> APNIC website at:
>
> http://www.apnic.net/meetings/22/docs/amm-disc-wilson-fees-pro
> posal.pdf
>
> According to this calculation the total increase for regular
> APNIC members
> is 2% overall. This does not seem to represent a large increase. Of
> course, for larger APNIC members the fees would increase by
> around %130,
> however this is justified by the principle of fairness which
> I think you
> have supported.
>
> Even under the proposed structure, the effective annual cost
> per IP address
> is still much lower for large members, as follows:
>
> Prefix Addresses Tier Annual Annual/address
> 6 67108864 I $92,160 $0.0014
> 7 33554432 I $92,160 $0.0027
> 8 16777216 I $92,160 $0.0055
> 10 4194304 H $46,080 $0.0110
> 12 1048576 G $23,040 $0.0220
> 14 262144 F $11,520 $0.0439
> 16 65536 E $5,760 $0.0879
> 18 16384 D $2,880 $0.1758
> 20 4096 C $1,440 $0.3516
> 21 2048 C $1,440 $0.7031
> 22 1024 B $720 $0.7031
> 24 256 A $360 $1.4063
>
> According to this table, a member holding a /7 pays an
> effective annual fee
> of USD $0.0027 per address while a member holding a /20 pays USD $0.35
>
>
> >########## In case of /7 of IPv4##########
> > annual membership fee
> > ARIN $18,000
> > Afrinic $20,000
> > LACNIC $33,000
> > APNIC $40,000 (average +12,250)
> ># Ave $27,750
> > proposaled fee structure $92,160(Current+52,160)
>
> It is true that your company would pay much more under this
> fee structure.
> Indeed the RIPE NCC fee for your company would be $5,750.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> Paul Wilson email:
> pwilson@apnic.net
> Director General, APNIC sip:
> apnic@voip.apnic.net
> http://www.apnic.net phone: +61
> 7 3858 3100
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> See you at APNIC 22! Kaosiung, Taiwan,
> 4-8 Sep 2006
>
> http://www.apnic.net/meetings
>
>
