NAIPR Message


On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Jeff Binkley wrote:

> Which brings us back to the whole purpose/benefit of this proposal.  Why 
> should they be forced to pay for something they don't have to pay for 
> today, only to have no/limited perceived benefit ?

No one is forced to pay for anything for which they recieve no benefit.

> This whole thing 
> reminds me of the government trying to levy taxes. 

TANSTAAFL. If you don't want to have government's levying taxes then 
you need to have a user-pay system.

> I've watched much of 
> the discussion going on here and many of the supporters tend not to be 
> ISPs or folks who would be directly finacnially impacted by this 
> proposal. 

A lot of the ISP's who would pay the most money under this proposal have
already been contacted directly and basically agreed to the whole plan.
Remember, the Internic only has allocated IP address blocks to 300
organizations not all of whom are ISP's. And there are 3,500 ISP's
and growing just in Canada and the USA alone. There are probably another
1,000 ISP's in the rest of the area under ARIN's jurisdiction.

> of the control was for) but the supports are saying make the ISPs pay 
> for it,

This is not wholly accurate. We have said several times and in several
ways that most ISP's will pay either nothing, or such a minimal amount
that it could not possibly have a negative impact on them.

Michael Dillon                   -               Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc.              -                  Fax: +1-250-546-3049             -               E-mail: michael at