[governance] Less than 10% of IPv4 Addresses Remain Unallocated,

[Fouad Bajwa]

Yes, I am taking notes on this and see how this works, my appreciation
and recognition to and for everyone's comments in the end.

In my discussions with APNIC staff during the IGF2009, on my question
of CS engagement I was referred to the membership page with costs.
After being subscribed to APNIC lists for my region for half a decade
and reading through the other announcement lists that I subscribe to,
I fail to find the missing connection apart from commercial
engagements and I know that funds most of the support to the APNIC
organization, operations and structure. The scholarships/fellowships
to APNIC activities/events/trainings are directed towards members and
usually entertains just members because they financially support the
process.

Isn't it odd that these administrative charges on not mentioned in
detail? Misunderstandings arise from lack of key information in these
cases.

Once again, has anyone seen a list at APNIC on non-commercial user
discussion? Please direct me to it as I would like to learn more about
their process of non-commercial engagement that the APNIC staff failed
to share.

Thanking everyone who joined this discussion in advance.

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 7:12 PM, George Sadowsky
<george.sadowsky at attglobal.net> wrote:
> Fouad,
> It's worth reading McTim's responses carefully.  In particular, there is
> room in RIR space for anyone who wants to make responsible comments to
> participate.  The RIRs are not closed organizations; they serve the ISPs of
> the region by administering address allocations for the benefit of their
> members, ISPs, and ultimately the users.  They do have administrative costs
> that they must recover.  However, those costs, as they are distributed down
> to the tail ISPs, are very minimal compared with almost all other costs
> involved in being a part of the network (sometimes even including tea and
> coffee  :-)  ).
> One of the most important functions that lists like this can perform, as
> well as meetings such as IGF, is to ensure that participants understand how
> the current system works.  An accurate understanding of the current system
> is really important for discussion to lead to useful progress.
> Regards,
> George
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> At 3:51 PM +0300 1/22/10, McTim wrote:
>
> Fouad,
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> That is actually a mis-perception. It costs to join APNIC and receive
> number resources.
>
> I labor under no misconception regarding how the RIRs operate.
>
> I am am active member of several RIR mailing lists.  Today for example, I
> have received a dozen or more mail from ARIN, RIPE and AfrINIC lists.
>
>
>
> http://www.apnic.net/services/become-a-member/how-much-does-it-cost
>
> If you visit the APNIC frontpage at http://www.apnic.net, you will see
> under the heading Internet Resources: How Much Does it Cost? and you
> will see the structure they have. All ISPs and service providers in
> the region have to buy their membership and then this trickles down to
> the end-users as well.
>
> Local Internet Registries should operate on a cost recovery basis, some do
> and some inevitably make IP addresses a profit center.
>
>
>
> Secondly there is no system for Civil Society
> and Non-Commercial User engagement
>
> This is where the misconception is entirely yours.  Anyone can join the
> policy discussion lists and have an impact on Internet numbering resource
> policy.  Currently, I do not represent any ISP or LIR, yet participate in
> developing policies in multiple regions.  Really, the system is open to
> anyone, technically minded or otherwise.  Milton's experience in the ARIN
> region also prove this, as he has had a not insignificant impact on ARIN
> policy making since he joined the list.
>
>
>
> , more or less, a structure coming
> down from the parent number resource system.
>
> Nope, completely bottom up.  Where do you get these false notions from?
>
>
> Actually its sold to APNIC Members that charge quite a fees that in
> most cases is far more than the amount of income for many in our part
> of the world. Have a look at the Membership Charges of APNIC.
>
> IP addresses are NOT sold.  You should read more completely:
>
> http://www.apnic.net/services/become-a-member/how-much-does-it-cost
>
> "APNIC does not sell Internet resources such as IP addresses.
>
> Instead, resources holders are granted the right to use these public
> resources. However, APNIC charges administration fees to assist in the
> management of this resource and the provision of services it provides the
> community."
>
> I have tracked their fees for many years, and find their system to be very
> fair.
>
> What you must understand is that for an ISP that wants IP blocks, one does
> not have to join a RIR to get them, they can simply get an assignment or
> sub-allocation from their upstream provider.  For larger ISPs, the cost of
> joining and getting an allocation is a tiny fraction of their monthly
> revenue.  It's part of the cost of doing business, like serving tea to the
> staff  (I know because the last ISP I worked for actually had a larger
> tea/sugar/milk budget than for the AfriNIC fees).
>
>
>
> The perception you shared is what is commonly shared amongst the
> Internet community from the developed world.
>
> This perception is also widely shared in the developing world.
>
>
> Its not an apple pie for
> us, really, we have some really tough problems here.
>
> Believe me I know what those problems are and work on them daily here in
> Africa.  The RIRs fees are NOT one of the problems.
>
> Its not how critically we think but what resources we have access to
> without Moolah (money) in between. The system is very vague indeed for
> the people that see it from outside but from the inside, you pay, you
> get.
>
>
> Do you honestly think that adding another layer of bureaucracy would make
> the system cheaper?
>
>
> I rest my case.
>
> I find no merit in your "case".
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t