Reject the NAIPR

>----------
>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
>

Paul,

I heard about the ARIN proposal through the AOP mail list. I went and read
the proposal. To be honest, the way the proposal is written I can't tell if
I will be affected or not. Can you or anyone else explain the proposed fee
chart?

Regardless, if I as a Class C license holder am charged or if my provider
is charged,
the charges, or some percentage thereof, will flow to me and my customers.
I don't like
extra fees, especially if it is not clear what how the fees were assessed
or what
services are provided as a result.

Your input clarifying this matter is appreciated.

Simon Clement