Reject the NAIPR

[Mark Richmond]

Paul;

Your comment does nothing to further this discussion.  The AOP has *not* requested it's members to write.  It has *informed* us that there is an issue to consider, and where to find out more about it.  That is the appropriate role of a professional organization.  Your lack of knowledge about AOP notwithstanding, it is made up of ISP's and many others who live and work online, and take these matters seriously.  Your employer can tell you more about it.

I have yet to see anything on this list that justifies the fee structure proposed.  What I do see is the same sort of petty bickering that has immobilized so many previous attempts at 'net improvement.  The bottom line, as always, is this:  who gets paid, and why?  If the internet community is to surrender control of such a vital resource to anyone in particular (an eventual certainty, at least) then why should it nbe this proposal?

Enough of the 'I said / You said' BS.  Why is this a good idea?

----------
From:   Paul Ferguson[SMTP:pferguso at cisco.com]
Sent:   Saturday, January 18, 1997 2:10 PM
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.

Does this mean that you DO completely understand 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.

This kind of irresponsible reply is contributing to the noise level.

... and so is mine.  My apologies.   
May we continue with the meat of the matter?  Why is this a good idea?