North America != Asia Pacific
ergo: take it elsewhere.
@
@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