[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for C

Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments
From: Terry manderson
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:21:06 +1000
Skeeve,

I really don't have a strong opinion on this. (Yeah thats a first! ;)

The reasons for my apathy are that I have several questions, and all statements 
made so far really don't offer up any concrete answers neither against nor in 
support of the recognition of the indian NIR.

Although I can't see how you can consider the NIR without also considering the 
financial aspects across the board as given all NIRs and APNIC are 
not-for-profit and operate fairly close to the line and are there to provide a 
'value' service for their members. 

A quick look at the APNIC delegated stats (for IPv4 alone) suggests that there 
are 683 v4 delegations to 331 entities in India that represents about 295 /16s. 
In the new fee structure that represents an aggregate amount for all those 
individual members of about AU$1,327,133 (I haven't worked out the votes).

Keep in mind that the possible NIR has a 190% premium applied to the formula as 
a single organisation with the entire 295 /16s. (assuming I got that 
interpretation correct). That represents a NIR fee of near $157,473. So 
certainly APNIC would see a drop of _current_ revenue assuming all of the India 
members migrated to this new NIR of around $1,169,660. I believe that any 
organisation  may choose to be a APNIC member or a member of their country's 
NIR (in such a situation).

My thoughts are wandering around a few areas: 

1) Will having an India NIR improve the service of address allocation to the 
indian network community? and why? Has APNIC not addressed that demographic 
appropriately? Or is there some other reason? Is the cultural/language 
diversity that great to necessitate the NIR?

2) Will having an Indian NIR decrease the work impact on APNIC by $1,169,660 
and the appropriate portion going into the future as the Internet in India 
develops? And will those savings be passed onto the ISPs in india as one might 
expect?

3) Will this give more or less incentive for India members to join the policy 
process?

4) Will this affect the voting constructs in APNIC (recalling the presentation 
by Akinori in Beijing highlighting that the Member votes are in the hands of 
the membership and not the EC - ie a member WG could be established to address 
this)

5) and likewise - I have heard very little from the India based ISPs. Some 
press is evident:
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2009/10/14/stories/2009101450740400.htm
and some discussion here:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/india-gii

But other than that the 'net appears silent. Makes me wonder where the desire 
comes from.

Again.. not for or against... just floating.

Terry


On 19/11/2009, at 1:56 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:

> Thanks for that Sanjaya... 
> 
> Well, we've seen zero public commentary... especially from this side of Asia 
> Pac... I don't know if there have been any private/direct submissions.
> 
> I guess most of us down here wouldn't have too much insight into how the 
> internet industry works in India and the stability of the organisations 
> proposing to manage INNIC.
> 
> Is there anyone out there who does have such insight and give us people who 
> don't know a little rundown of the internet industry/community over in India 
> - even people from India itself...   
> 
> I would like to hear that people in the Indian ISP community is happy with 
> what is being proposed.
> 
> A complete lack of response, supporting for or against is a little concerning.
> 
> ...Skeeve
> 
> --
> Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director
> eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
> [email protected] / www.eintellego.net
> Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
> Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
> www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego
> --
> NOC, NOC, who's there?
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:apnic-talk-
>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Sanjaya
>> Sent: Thursday, 19 November 2009 1:23 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR -
>> Call for Comments
>> 
>> Hi Skeeve,
>> 
>> Thanks for your feedback!
>> 
>> The objective of the APNIC EC's Call for Comment is not to begin a
>> collective financial analysis of the proposal. Rather, the EC wants to
>> find out whether the APNIC community is comfortable with the formation
>> of an NIR for India, or whether they are aware of risks or further
>> considerations the EC should investigate as part of its evaluation
>> process.
>> 
>> If there are concerns related to the financial impact that such an NIR
>> may have on the fees of direct APNIC members, these concerns of course
>> should be noted. Equally, if members think such national entities
>> should
>> be recognized where there is clear local community support, this should
>> also be expressed.
>> 
>> The intent of the Call for Comment was to allow members and
>> stakeholders
>> a chance to express their concerns and thoughts on the matter and the
>> EC
>> would certainly appreciate any comments you may care to make.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Sanjaya
>> 
>> 
>> Skeeve Stevens wrote:
>>> Umm... It's a good thing?
>>> 
>>> I've not seen any public comments on this... Is there any opinions
>> out there on whether the NIR for India is a good/bad idea?
>>> 
>>> Can we have some commentary from APNIC on the impact of this change
>> will have on revenue (clearly initially none as members would have to
>> cease being APNIC members and become INNIC members - I assume?).
>>> 
>>> But if they did all become INNIC members, what would the impact on
>> APNIC be?  Not that this is a reason to put forward a negative
>> position, but I am just wondering.
>>> 
>>> ...Skeeve
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director
>>> eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
>>> [email protected] / www.eintellego.net
>>> Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
>>> Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
>>> www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego
>>> --
>>> NOC, NOC, who's there?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:apnic-announce-
>>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Secretariat
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 18 November 2009 1:56 PM
>>>> To: APNIC Announce
>>>> Subject: [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for
>> Comments
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> Application for India NIR - Call for Comments
>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI) has lodged an
>>>> application
>>>> for recognition as a National Internet Registry (NIR). If recognized
>> as
>>>> an NIR, NIXI would be able to offer IP (Internet Protocol) address
>>>> allocation and other APNIC services at a national level in India.
>>>> 
>>>> In the interests of openness and transparency, the APNIC Executive
>>>> Council (EC) requests public review of the NIXI application and has
>>>> issued a Call for Comments to gauge community support.
>>>> 
>>>> The EC will accept public or confidential comments until Monday, 30
>>>> November 2009 at 17:30 (UTC+10 - Brisbane time).
>>>> 
>>>> Confidential comments may be:
>>>> 
>>>> - Emailed to the Executive Secretary of the EC at exec-
>> [email protected]
>>>> - Submitted using the web form at http://www.apnic.net/NIR_Comments
>>>> 
>>>> Comments may also be made publicly and discussed on the "apnic-talk"
>>>> mailing list. More information on the list is available at:
>>>> 
>>>>   http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists
>>>> 
>>>> The APNIC EC is responsible for evaluating and approving the
>>>> application, but before the EC can do so, it must be satisfied that
>>>> NIXI
>>>> meets the "Criteria for the recognition of NIRs in the APNIC
>> region",
>>>> as
>>>> set out in the policy available at:
>>>> 
>>>>   http://www.apnic.net/policy/nir-criteria
>>>> 
>>>> These criteria require NIXI to:
>>>> 
>>>> - Demonstrate formal endorsement at the national level by the
>>>>   appropriate government body
>>>> - Be an independent legal entity with a non-profit structure
>>>> - Demonstrate a stable funding model
>>>> - Demonstrate it holds a neutral position
>>>> - Have the organizational and technical capacity to implement
>>>>   APNIC address management policies
>>>> 
>>>> For more information, see:
>>>> 
>>>>   http://www.apnic.net/nir
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC
>> <[email protected]>
>>>> http://www.apnic.net                           ph/fx +61 7 3858
>> 3100/99
>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Apnic-announce mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-announce
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> apnic-talk mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> _
>> Sanjaya                                     email:
>> [email protected]
>> Services Area Manager, APNIC                sip:
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.apnic.net                        phone:       +61 7 3858
>> 3100
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> _
>>  * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
>> _______________________________________________
>> apnic-talk mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
> _______________________________________________
> apnic-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk

_______________________________________________
apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>