Orbit

Hi Billy,

Thank you for your contribution!

Akinori

In message 009001c47466$95624c70$c2d0ffcb@Billy "Re: NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s)" ""MH Billy Cheon" cmh@nic.or.kr" wrote:

| Hi Maemura-san, | | Sorry for late reply. | | In response to your request, KRNIC would like to share our experience | in "KRNIC Whois Databse Update & Upgrade" project at NIR SIG. | | Cheers, | Billy | | | > Dear NIR-SIG Colleagues, | > | > Please be reminded about call for presentations and have a | > look ate final call which is pasted at the end of this | > message. | > | > As I mentioned NIR-SIG is an information exchange forum | > rather than policy discussion while of course we can propose | > and discuss about policy, I'd like to encourage you to make | > any kind of update or status report on your NIR's business | > operations. | > | > Moreover, I myself am curious about volunteer for co-chair | > because I haven't had anything. I definitely need your help | > because I am no lifetime chair for this NIR-SIG :-p . You | > can write to me privately if you have any unclear points. | > | > | > Thanks again for your active contribution which will be of | > benefit for our community. | > | > | > Best Regards, | > MAEMURA Akinori, Chair of NIR-SIG | > | > | > In message 200406081213.BFC59063.FNNB@maem.org | > "NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s)" | > "MAEMURA Akinori maem@maem.org" wrote: | > | > | Dear NIR-SIG Colleagues, | > | | > | Please be advised that your proposals and presentations in | > | the APNIC 18 SIGs are called, and also I on behalf of Chair | > | of NIR-SIG am calling for new co-chair. | > | | > | | > | | > | Regarding presentations, in case you wll make a proposal - | > | a (P) presentation, you have to submit it through the online | > | form by Wednesday August 4th. | > | | > | This is not the case for (I) - Informational presentations | > | but still it would be appreciated if you sooner present your | > | willingness to make an (I) one. I'm looking forward to | > | having a lot of your contributions in Fiji. | > | | > | Pleaser refer the generic call for proposals for the datail. | > | | > | | > | | > | At the same time to call for your (P) and (I) presentations, | > | I'd like to call for *co-chair* of NIR SIG who will work with | > | me to coordinate this SIG. By the last meeting Chia-Nan HSIEH | > | was taking this position but he is now withdrawing from this | > | position. Thank you for your applause toward Taipei to him | > | for his good job as co-chair. | > | | > | Please advise sig-nir-chair@apnic.net if you are interested | > | in or willing to take this position. | > | | > | | > | See you in Fiji, it's gonna be fun! | > | | > | Regards, | > | --- | > | MAEMURA Akinori, on behalf of Chair of NIR-SIG | > | | > | > | > ________________________ | > | > Final call for proposals | > ________________________ | > | > [18th APNIC Open Policy Meeting | > 31 August - 3 September 2004 | > Nadi, Fiji] | > | > | > Dear Colleagues, | > | > The deadline for proposals to be discussed in the Special Interest Group | > (SIGs) at APNIC 18 is now only three weeks away. | > | > Proposals are welcome from anyone interested in the management of Internet | > Resources in the Asia Pacific region and must be submitted by 04 August | > 2004. | > | > | > SIG presentation types | > ---------------------- | > | > a) Informational (I) - typically a status report delivered to convey | > information to the audience (requests to make an informational | > presentation can be made to the SIG chair at any time but preferably | > minimum 2 weeks before the meeting). | > | > b) Policy proposal (P) - a proposal which requires feedback and | > community consensus before it can proceed. | > | > Please mark your submission as either "I" or "P". Policy proposals (P) must | > be submitted by 04 August 2004 to be considered for consensus decisions at | > the Open Policy Meeting. | > | > | > Policy proposal (P) requirements | > -------------------------------- | > | > Submissions should be: | > - in TEXT format | > - received no later than 04 August 2004 | > - relevant to the SIG | > | > More information | > ---------------- | > SIG archive/Guideline for presenters: | > http://www.apnic.net/meetings/archive/sigs/ | > | > | > SIG chairs | > ---------- | > | > * Address Policy SIG sig-policy-chair@apnic.net | > * Database SIG sig-db-chair@apnic.net | > * DNS Operations SIG sig-dns-chair@apnic.net | > * IPv6 (Technical) SIG sig-ipv6-chair@apnic.net | > * IX SIG sig-ix-chair@apnic.net | > * NIR SIG sig-nir-chair@apnic.net | > * Routing SIG sig-routing-chair@apnic.net | > | > | > Please send your proposal to the appropriate SIG chair, cc'ing | > sig@apnic.net, NO LATER THAN 04 August 2004. | > _______________________________________________ | > sig-nir mailing list | > sig-nir@lists.apnic.net | > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir |

Thanks Izumi,

On behalf of the SIG Chair I appreciate your contribution.

On behalf of head of JPNIC IP department I hope this will be informative to NIR Colleagues.

Akinori

In message 20040803.181301.68560371.izumi@nic.ad.jp "Re: NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s)" "Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp" wrote:

| Dear Maemura-san, | | | In addition to the proposals we have submitted online, JPNIC would | like to make an informational presentation on "JPNIC Update" if the | time slot is still available. | | It will take about 15 minutes, introducing JPNIC activities since the | last meeting. | | Thank you in advance for your consideration. | | | Best Regards, | Izumi | JPNIC | |

Izumi,

Thanks for this submission. Hope we can have a good disucussion and result on this proposal.

Regards, Akinori, Chair of NIR-SIG

In message 20040804.102257.68557585.izumi@nic.ad.jp "Re: NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s)" "Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp" wrote:

| Maemura-san and NIR colleagues, | | | The following is the proposal I have submitted online yesterday. | | I am looking forward to have discussions with you at Fiji, but any | feedbacks or comments in advance are also very welcome. | | | Best Regards, | Izumi | JPNIC | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Your name: Izumi Okutani | | Your email address: izumi@nic.ad.jp | | Co-Authors: | | SIG: nir | | Title: A proposal to abolish redundant charges in IPv6 allocations | | Introduction: This paper proposes to revise a method of calculating IPv6 per | address fee so that multiple fees charged for the same address range will | be abolished. | | Summary: "Per address fee" is the fee charged for allocations which NIRs or | NIR members receive. Therefore, per address fee should only be charged for | newly allocated ranges. | | However, the current per address fee scheme defined in APNIC-081 "APNIC Fee | Schedule: Membership Tiers, Fees, and Descriptions" ,leads to multiple | charges for the same address range in IPv6 allocations. The following how it | is defined in the document: | | APNIC-081 "APNIC Fee Schedule: Membership Tiers, Fees, and Descriptions" | 3.4.3 IPv6 address space | | For an allocation of IPv6 address space, the total per- | address fee is calculated for the prefix allocated according | to the number of addresses which should be utilised according | to an HD-Ratio of 0.80. | | (snip..) | | In the case of an allocation which includes a previously | allocated block of addresses, the total fee calculation is | based on the size of the prefix allocated, regardless of the | previous allocation. | | Under this scheme, NIRs will be charged for the address space which had been | previously charged when they receive subsequent allocations which are | contiguous from previous allocations(see the chart below). | | +-----+ | | /32 | | +-----+ | (new allocation) | (charge) | | | +-----------+ | | /31 | | +-----------+ | (new allocation - /32) | (charge) | | +--------------------------+ | | /30 | | +--------------------------+ | (new allocation - /31) | (charge) | | As a result, NIRs must either come up with a way to cover the redundant | charge without charging their memebrs, or apply the same scheme to their | members. JPNIC applies the same scheme, but we are unable to make a | reasonable justification. | | Furtheremore, it leads to LIRs which conserve address space(requesting for | small allocations as a start) have to | pay more fee than LIRs which request for large allocations at once: | | (case-1) /32 initially, then upgrade to /31, /30, until /29 | | Initial allocation (/32) : 7,132 * per address fee | Second allocation (/32, /31 in total) : 12,417 * per address fee | Third allocation (/31, /30 in total) : 21,619 * per address fee | Fourth allocation (/30, /29 in total) : 37,641 * per address fee | ------------------------------------------------------------------- | Fee total : 78,809 * per address fee | | | (case-2) /29 initial allocation | | Initial allocation (/29) : 37,641 * per address fee | | Situation: N/A | | Details: The proposal is to replace APNIC-081 as below; | | | 3.4.3 IPv6 address space | | For an allocation of IPv6 address space, the total per- | address fee is calculated for the prefix allocated according | to the number of addresses which should be utilised according | to an HD-Ratio of 0.80. | | (snip..) | | In the case of an allocation which includes a previously | allocated block of addresses, the total fee calculation is | based on the difference in the number of /48s corresponding | to HD-ratio 0.8, between the previous allocation and the new | allocation. | | For example, the total per-address fee payable for an | allocation of /30 including previous /32 allocation to a "Very | Large" member is calculated as: | | (21,619 - 7,132) x $ 0.03 = $ 434.61 | | Note: The number of /48s for /32 under HD ratio 0.8: 7,132 | The number of /48s for /30 under HD ratio 0.8: 21,619 | | Pros/Cons: Adopting the proposed method of fee calculation would lead to: | | Advantages | 1) Multiple fees will no longer be charged for the same address range. | | 2) Same fee will be charged in total regardless of the size of past | allocations. | | (case-1') /32 initially, then upgrade to /31, /30, until /29 | | Initial allocation (/32) : 7,132 * per address fee | Second allocation (/32, /31 in total) : (12,417-7,132) * per address fee | Third allocation (/31, /30 in total) : (21,619-12,417) * per address fee | Fourth allocation (/30, /29 in total) : (37,641-21,619) * per addless fee | ------------------------------------------------------------------- | Fee total : 37,641 * per address fee | | | (case-2') /29 initial allocation | | Initial allocation (/29) : 37,641 * per address fee | = case-1' | Disadvantages: | None. | | Effect on APNIC: No effect on APNIC members. | | Effect on NIRs: NIRs(and indirectly, NIR members) are no longer required to | pay multiple per address fee for the same address range |

hi Izumi,

Just a note in response to let you know that the impact of this proposal as well as the proposal [prop-024-v001] 'Changing the NIR fee structure' are both currently being analysed. It is hoped that a result will be available before the meeting.

Best wishes, Anne ----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Izumi Okutani wrote:

Hi all,

Just as Toshi, I would be interested to know an opinion of the APNIC secretariat if this proposal is reasonable in terms of APNIC's operational expenses.

Comments from NIRs are also very welcome, and looking forward for your feedbacks.

Best Regards, Izumi JPNIC

From: Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp Subject: Re: NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:22:57 +0900 (JST)

...

Maemura-san and NIR colleagues,

The following is the proposal I have submitted online yesterday.

I am looking forward to have discussions with you at Fiji, but any feedbacks or comments in advance are also very welcome.

Best Regards, Izumi JPNIC

---

Your name: Izumi Okutani

Your email address: izumi@nic.ad.jp

Co-Authors:

SIG: nir

Title: A proposal to abolish redundant charges in IPv6 allocations

Introduction: This paper proposes to revise a method of calculating IPv6 per address fee so that multiple fees charged for the same address range will be abolished.

Summary: "Per address fee" is the fee charged for allocations which NIRs or NIR members receive. Therefore, per address fee should only be charged for newly allocated ranges.

However, the current per address fee scheme defined in APNIC-081 "APNIC Fee Schedule: Membership Tiers, Fees, and Descriptions" ,leads to multiple charges for the same address range in IPv6 allocations. The following how it is defined in the document:

APNIC-081 "APNIC Fee Schedule: Membership Tiers, Fees, and Descriptions" 3.4.3 IPv6 address space

For an allocation of IPv6 address space, the total per- address fee is calculated for the prefix allocated according to the number of addresses which should be utilised according to an HD-Ratio of 0.80.

    (snip..)

In the case of an allocation which includes a previously allocated block of addresses, the total fee calculation is based on the size of the prefix allocated, regardless of the previous allocation.

Under this scheme, NIRs will be charged for the address space which had been previously charged when they receive subsequent allocations which are contiguous from previous allocations(see the chart below).

+-----+ | /32 | +-----+ (new allocation) (charge)

+-----------+ | /31 | +-----------+ (new allocation - /32) (charge)

+--------------------------+ | /30 | +--------------------------+ (new allocation - /31) (charge)

As a result, NIRs must either come up with a way to cover the redundant charge without charging their memebrs, or apply the same scheme to their members. JPNIC applies the same scheme, but we are unable to make a reasonable justification.

Furtheremore, it leads to LIRs which conserve address space(requesting for small allocations as a start) have to pay more fee than LIRs which request for large allocations at once:

(case-1) /32 initially, then upgrade to /31, /30, until /29

Initial allocation (/32) : 7,132 * per address fee Second allocation (/32, /31 in total) : 12,417 * per address fee Third allocation (/31, /30 in total) : 21,619 * per address fee Fourth allocation (/30, /29 in total) : 37,641 * per address fee

---

Fee total : 78,809 * per address fee

(case-2) /29 initial allocation

Initial allocation (/29) : 37,641 * per address fee

Situation: N/A

Details: The proposal is to replace APNIC-081 as below;

3.4.3 IPv6 address space

For an allocation of IPv6 address space, the total per- address fee is calculated for the prefix allocated according to the number of addresses which should be utilised according to an HD-Ratio of 0.80.

    (snip..)

In the case of an allocation which includes a previously allocated block of addresses, the total fee calculation is based on the difference in the number of /48s corresponding to HD-ratio 0.8, between the previous allocation and the new allocation.

    For example, the total per-address fee payable for an

allocation of /30 including previous /32 allocation to a "Very Large" member is calculated as:

       (21,619 - 7,132) x $ 0.03 = $ 434.61

    Note: The number of /48s for /32 under HD ratio 0.8:  7,132
          The number of /48s for /30 under HD ratio 0.8: 21,619

Pros/Cons: Adopting the proposed method of fee calculation would lead to:

Advantages

1. Multiple fees will no longer be charged for the same address range.

2. Same fee will be charged in total regardless of the size of past

allocations.

(case-1') /32 initially, then upgrade to /31, /30, until /29

Initial allocation (/32) : 7,132 * per address fee Second allocation (/32, /31 in total) : (12,417-7,132) * per address fee Third allocation (/31, /30 in total) : (21,619-12,417) * per address fee Fourth allocation (/30, /29 in total) : (37,641-21,619) * per addless fee

---

Fee total : 37,641 * per address fee

(case-2') /29 initial allocation

Initial allocation (/29) : 37,641 * per address fee = case-1' Disadvantages: None.

Effect on APNIC: No effect on APNIC members.

Effect on NIRs: NIRs(and indirectly, NIR members) are no longer required to pay multiple per address fee for the same address range

---

sig-nir mailing list sig-nir@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir

Great to hear your name for this, David. Thank you very much.

Regards, Akinori

In message 4133F420.7010503@twnic.net.tw "Re: NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s)" "David Chen david@twnic.net.tw" wrote:

| Dear all, | | My name is David Chen from TWNIC. As a member of NIR community, I'm an | volunteer for NIR co-chair to provide my contribution to NIR community. | I know this job is a challenge for me, but I would like to contribute my | time and make more effort for the community. I am more than happy to | take the job. Hope all of you could accept me and also give me some | advise on NIR SIG operation. Thank you very much! | | If you have any comment, please kindly let me know. | | Best Regards, | | David Chen | TWNIC | | | MAEMURA Akinori wrote: | | >Dear NIR-SIG Colleagues, | > | >Please be reminded about call for presentations and have a | >look ate final call which is pasted at the end of this | >message. | > | >As I mentioned NIR-SIG is an information exchange forum | >rather than policy discussion while of course we can propose | >and discuss about policy, I'd like to encourage you to make | >any kind of update or status report on your NIR's business | >operations. | > | >Moreover, I myself am curious about volunteer for co-chair | >because I haven't had anything. I definitely need your help | >because I am no lifetime chair for this NIR-SIG :-p . You | >can write to me privately if you have any unclear points. | > | > | >Thanks again for your active contribution which will be of | >benefit for our community. | > | > | >Best Regards, | >MAEMURA Akinori, Chair of NIR-SIG | > | > | >In message 200406081213.BFC59063.FNNB@maem.org | > "NIR-SIG at APNIC18 - Call for presentations and new co-chair(s)" | > "MAEMURA Akinori maem@maem.org" wrote: | > | >| Dear NIR-SIG Colleagues, | >| | >| Please be advised that your proposals and presentations in | >| the APNIC 18 SIGs are called, and also I on behalf of Chair | >| of NIR-SIG am calling for new co-chair. | >| | >| | >| | >| Regarding presentations, in case you wll make a proposal - | >| a (P) presentation, you have to submit it through the online | >| form by Wednesday August 4th. | >| | >| This is not the case for (I) - Informational presentations | >| but still it would be appreciated if you sooner present your | >| willingness to make an (I) one. I'm looking forward to | >| having a lot of your contributions in Fiji. | >| | >| Pleaser refer the generic call for proposals for the datail. | >| | >| | >| | >| At the same time to call for your (P) and (I) presentations, | >| I'd like to call for *co-chair* of NIR SIG who will work with | >| me to coordinate this SIG. By the last meeting Chia-Nan HSIEH | >| was taking this position but he is now withdrawing from this | >| position. Thank you for your applause toward Taipei to him | >| for his good job as co-chair. | >| | >| Please advise sig-nir-chair@apnic.net if you are interested | >| in or willing to take this position. | >| | >| | >| See you in Fiji, it's gonna be fun! | >| | >| Regards, | >| --- | >| MAEMURA Akinori, on behalf of Chair of NIR-SIG | >| | > | > | >________________________ | > | >Final call for proposals | >________________________ | > | >[18th APNIC Open Policy Meeting | >31 August - 3 September 2004 | >Nadi, Fiji] | > | > | >Dear Colleagues, | > | >The deadline for proposals to be discussed in the Special Interest Group | >(SIGs) at APNIC 18 is now only three weeks away. | > | >Proposals are welcome from anyone interested in the management of Internet | >Resources in the Asia Pacific region and must be submitted by 04 August | >2004. | > | > | >SIG presentation types | >---------------------- | > | >a) Informational (I) - typically a status report delivered to convey | > information to the audience (requests to make an informational | > presentation can be made to the SIG chair at any time but preferably | > minimum 2 weeks before the meeting). | > | >b) Policy proposal (P) - a proposal which requires feedback and | > community consensus before it can proceed. | > | >Please mark your submission as either "I" or "P". Policy proposals (P) must | >be submitted by 04 August 2004 to be considered for consensus decisions at | >the Open Policy Meeting. | > | > | >Policy proposal (P) requirements | >-------------------------------- | > | >Submissions should be: | >- in TEXT format | >- received no later than 04 August 2004 | >- relevant to the SIG | > | >More information | >---------------- | > SIG archive/Guideline for presenters: | > http://www.apnic.net/meetings/archive/sigs/ | > | > | >SIG chairs | >---------- | > | > * Address Policy SIG sig-policy-chair@apnic.net | > * Database SIG sig-db-chair@apnic.net | > * DNS Operations SIG sig-dns-chair@apnic.net | > * IPv6 (Technical) SIG sig-ipv6-chair@apnic.net | > * IX SIG sig-ix-chair@apnic.net | > * NIR SIG sig-nir-chair@apnic.net | > * Routing SIG sig-routing-chair@apnic.net | > | > | >Please send your proposal to the appropriate SIG chair, cc'ing | >sig@apnic.net, NO LATER THAN 04 August 2004. | >_______________________________________________ | >sig-nir mailing list | >sig-nir@lists.apnic.net | >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir | > | > | > |