RE: Fwd: FW: Removal from APNIC lists
On Wednesday, May 20, 1998 9:17 AM, Perry E. Metzger[SMTP:perry@piermont.com] wrote: @ @Eric Germann writes: @> There is a God. @ @Now if only someone could get him off of the IETF and nanog lists, and @maybe a few others... @ @.pm @ According to the APNIC Annual Report, the data base of information is not accurate[1]. Despite this, the APNIC received an additional allocation of over 16 million IPv4 addresses in April of 1997. That appears to be the same time that the APNIC paid the IANA $50,000 in service fees. This also appears to be at a time when the APNIC had not used the addresses it already had. Why does a private company like APNIC, set up in an off-shore haven like the Seychelles, and operating out of Tokyo, with apparently no taxes being paid to Japan[2], be allowed to obtain additional IPv4 address space with apparently no justification and an admission of poor record keeping while U.S. ISPs and other companies around the world are put through the ringer for a few IPv4 addresses ? Jim Fleming ================================================== http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/resource_status.htm#c4_1 Percentage Used ------------------------- 0% 61.x.x.x <-------- April 25, 1997 0% 169.208.x.x 0% 169.209.x.x 0% 169.210.x.x 0% 169.211.x.x 0% 169.212.x.x 0% 169.213.x.x 0% 169.214.x.x 0% 169.215.x.x 80% 202.x.x.x 80% 203.x.x.x 12% 210.x.x.x 12% 211.x.x.x @@@@ http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/financial_status.htm#c3_2 "Service fees which consisted of the APNIC payment of US $50,000 to the IANA in April, 1997;" @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ [1] @@@ http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/future_directions.htm#c6_1 "Database Cleanup The current registry database system is has significant amounts of incorrect data. This is a significant issue as the registry database is intended to be the location of authoritative information on which organizations control which resources. It is likely that unless the registry database system is revised, conflicts will arise when organizations attempt to obtain Internet connectivity with historically allocated resources but which no longer have up to date information in the registry database." @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ [2] @@@ http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/other_activities.htm#c5_2 "APNIC Headquarters Relocation Around first quarter 1997, APNIC began to investigate what would be required to hire additional staff for the APNIC office in Japan. After lengthy consultations with various organizations, it was established that the question of whether APNIC needed to pay tax in Japan was somewhat indeterminate. Specifically, according to two of three accountancy firms, APNIC should pay taxes, while the third indicated exactly the opposite. After significant discussion, it was decided to evaluate the costs of doing business in Japan vis-a-vis doing business in other Asia or Pacific Rim locations." @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ - Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net/IPv8 IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM
North America != Asia Pacific ergo: take it elsewhere. At 09:23 AM 5/20/98 -0500, Jim Fleming wrote:
On Wednesday, May 20, 1998 9:17 AM, Perry E. Metzger[SMTP:perry@piermont.com] wrote: @ @Eric Germann writes: @> There is a God. @ @Now if only someone could get him off of the IETF and nanog lists, and @maybe a few others... @ @.pm @
According to the APNIC Annual Report, the data base of information is not accurate[1]. Despite this, the APNIC received an additional allocation of over 16 million IPv4 addresses in April of 1997. That appears to be the same time that the APNIC paid the IANA $50,000 in service fees. This also appears to be at a time when the APNIC had not used the addresses it already had.
Why does a private company like APNIC, set up in an off-shore haven like the Seychelles, and operating out of Tokyo, with apparently no taxes being paid to Japan[2], be allowed to obtain additional IPv4 address space with apparently no justification and an admission of poor record keeping while U.S. ISPs and other companies around the world are put through the ringer for a few IPv4 addresses ?
Jim Fleming
================================================== http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/resource_status.htm#c4_1
Percentage Used ------------------------- 0% 61.x.x.x <-------- April 25, 1997 0% 169.208.x.x 0% 169.209.x.x 0% 169.210.x.x 0% 169.211.x.x 0% 169.212.x.x 0% 169.213.x.x 0% 169.214.x.x 0% 169.215.x.x 80% 202.x.x.x 80% 203.x.x.x 12% 210.x.x.x 12% 211.x.x.x
@@@@ http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/financial_status.htm#c3_2
"Service fees which consisted of the APNIC payment of US $50,000 to the IANA in April, 1997;"
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
[1] @@@ http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/future_directions.htm#c6_1
"Database Cleanup The current registry database system is has significant amounts of incorrect data. This is a significant issue as the registry database is intended to be the location of authoritative information on which organizations control which resources. It is likely that unless the registry database system is revised, conflicts will arise when organizations attempt to obtain Internet connectivity with historically allocated resources but which no longer have up to date information in the registry database."
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
[2] @@@ http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/other_activities.htm#c5_2
"APNIC Headquarters Relocation
Around first quarter 1997, APNIC began to investigate what would be required to hire additional staff for the APNIC office in Japan. After lengthy consultations with various organizations, it was established that the question of whether APNIC needed to pay tax in Japan was somewhat indeterminate. Specifically, according to two of three accountancy firms, APNIC should pay taxes, while the third indicated exactly the opposite. After significant discussion, it was decided to evaluate the costs of doing business in Japan vis-a-vis doing business in other Asia or Pacific Rim locations."
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ -
Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net/IPv8 IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM
============================================================================ ==== Eric Germann Computer and Communications Technologies ekgermann@cctec.com Van Wert, OH 45891 Phone: 419 968 2640 http://www.cctec.com Fax: 419 968 2641 Network Design, Connectivity & System Integration Services A Microsoft Solution Provider
Jim, this is NANOG. This is not the appropriate place to discuss APNIC's mismanagement of allocations or financial matters, if those allegations are even correct. We're all sick of you ranting (obviously). If you're going to rant, AT LEAST rant on the appropriate list. Stephen Jim Fleming wrote:
According to the APNIC Annual Report, the data base of information is not accurate[1]. Despite this, the APNIC received an additional allocation of over 16 million IPv4 addresses in April of 1997. That appears to be the same time that the APNIC paid the IANA $50,000 in service fees. This also appears to be at a time when the APNIC had not used the addresses it already had.
Why does a private company like APNIC, set up in an off-shore haven like the Seychelles, and operating out of Tokyo, with apparently no taxes being paid to Japan[2], be allowed to obtain additional IPv4 address space with apparently no justification and an admission of poor record keeping while U.S. ISPs and other companies around the world are put through the ringer for a few IPv4 addresses ?
- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net/IPv8 IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM
-- Stephen Sprunk, KD5DWP "Oops." Email: sprunk@paranet.com Sprint Paranet -Albert Einstein ICBM: 33.00151N 96.82326W
Why does a private company like APNIC, set up in an off-shore haven like the Seychelles, and operating out of Tokyo, with apparently no taxes being paid to Japan[2], be allowed to obtain additional IPv4 address space with apparently no justification and an admission of poor record keeping while U.S. ISPs and other companies around the world are put through the ringer for a few IPv4 addresses ?
Jim, ever tried getting IPs off APNIC? Nuff said. Adrian
Frankly, I have no idea what the real reason is. But I can see two speculative possibilites: 1) They killed Kennedy, and have been getting payoffs ever since. 2) Perhaps, since the Internet is rapidly growing in Asia, and since 1/4 of the worlds population lives there, they have been given enough address space to bring much of that population online. Presumably, a private company doesn't have to report how much taxes is pays or doesn't pay.
Why does a private company like APNIC, set up in an off-shore haven like the Seychelles, and operating out of Tokyo, with apparently no taxes being paid to Japan[2], be allowed to obtain additional IPv4 address space with apparently no justification and an admission of poor record keeping while U.S. ISPs and other companies around the world are put through the ringer for a few IPv4 addresses ?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean@av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP/DCE http://www.av8.com We Make IT Fly! (617)242-3091 x246 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Thu, May 21, 1998 at 08:48:25PM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
1) They killed Kennedy, and have been getting payoffs ever since.
My ghod! They killed Kenny? Cheers, -- jr 'those bastards' a -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "Two words: Darth Doogie." -- Jason Colby, Tampa Bay, Florida on alt.fan.heinlein +1 813 790 7592 Managing Editor, Top Of The Key sports e-zine ------------ http://www.totk.com
participants (6)
-
Adrian Chadd -
Dean Anderson -
Eric Germann -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Jim Fleming -
Stephen Sprunk