Reject the NAIPR

I am interested in this only as a small business owner who cannot afford to stay on the Internet if costs increase.  I cannot understand how an upstream provider would not pass through these charges, who would then pass them on to me.
Linda Emmele

----------
From:   Paul Ferguson[SMTP:pferguso at cisco.com]
Sent:   Saturday, January 18, 1997 8:10 AM
To:     Mark Richmond
Cc:     'naipr at lists.internic.net'; aop at cris.com
Subject:        Re: Reject the NAIPR

Folks,

It is obvious that members & affiliates of the AOP (Association of
Online professionals, who according to c|net radio, is an organization
representing ~600 small & medium sized ISP's) have been encouraged to
deluge this mailing list with notes of dissention, irrespective of
the fact that they do not completely understand the ARIN proposal.

In fact, I would suggest that in a majority of the cases, the smaller,
lower-echelon ISP's will obtain their IP addresses from their upstream
service provider and will be completed unaffected by the ARIN proposal.

This type of form-letter bombardment of this mailing list is extremely
annoying. This is not to say that constructive criticism & discussion
on the proposal is unwelcome, but it would be most appreciated if
folks would take a few moments to familiarize themselves with the
proposal before flooding the list with their dissenting messages.

- paul



At 07:59 AM 1/17/97 -0000, Mark Richmond wrote:

>To Whom:
>
>I urge you to reject the ARIN proposal.  The proposal reflects a
>fundamental misunderstanding of the economics of Internet access in a
>global market.  The ramifications would be severe.
>
>While there are benefits to organization, there would be benefits here
>only to the founders of ARIN.  As there is no explanation given for the
>proposed fees, I can only assume that they would serve two purposes: To
>enrich the licensing agency, and to force smaller operators out of the
>ISP business.   Neither of these seems worthwhile.
>
>I seriously question  the motives of anyone in favor of this proposal as it
>has been explained.
>
>
>Mark Richmond
>CNE, AOP, CPIM
>District Technology Coordinator
>Tulare City Schools, CA