[AusNOG] Aus Industry Congratulations Email

Tue Sep 6 15:58:01 EST 2016

That is crap Paul.

You've been around long enough to know what is going on and also to know
when to call bullshit on these funding requests.

If you want to put your head in the sand, fine, but don't expect all of us
to do so.

We don't have to be lawyers. Most of this is pretty obvious. Some of us
have built more than enough networks to be very qualified to opine about
the requirements for DRIP, ICP, Carrier obligations and powers and so on.
There are very few lawyers out there who have any idea about this sort of
thing, much less been able to provide any sort of useful advice to most of
the smaller ISPs - which I assume most have not even obtained.

Your Email from June 10 2015 -
http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/2015-June/031557.html clearly
describes who is and isn't and ISP and eligible.

I'm not sure any Uni's can be considered Carriage Service Providers. They
need to be supplying an 'internet carriage service *to the public*'.  I
don't think any Uni's do this commercially (their might be examples?) that
is not related to their business of education and research at which point,
the user isn't 'the public'.  Given their upstream, AARNET is covered, it I
wonder why that is not good enough?

What examples do you think a Uni could have which is a service which is
eligible?

Paul, you are Vice Chair of Internet Australia. I'd expect you to stand up
against funding abuse and be able to use the wisdom you have from being in
this industry a long time.

...Skeeve

*Skeeve Stevens - Founder & The Architect* - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
Email: skeeve at eintellegonetworks.com
<https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=skeeve@eintellegonetworks.com>
;
Web: eintellegonetworks.com

Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; Skype: skeeve ; LinkedIn: /in/skeeve
<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; Expert360: Profile
<https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9> ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Paul Brooks <pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au
<https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au>
> wrote:

> FFS, are we seriously going to have all these discussions all over again?
> We covered universities, and services, and who would be eligible and why,
> way back when the DRIPS were first requested. Some Universities clearly
> think they provide services that need a DRIP, some clearly don't. There's
> no particular reason why a University would be exempt, if they provide
> eligible services.
>
> The bigger question is - why in all the seven hells does anyone think they
> have the right, the knowledge, and the legal insight to question whether
> anyone deserves or doesn't deserve anything, when ultimately it comes down
> to an internal legal opinion (*not* technical opinion) for every
> organisation as to what an organisation has to do to cover themselves from
> liability.
>
> Seriously list - unless you are actually a lawyer, qualified to give
> opinion, and expert on every word in the relevent legislation, AND you know
> all about the internals of each orghanisation including their internal
> legal advice on which they relied to prepare and submit a DRIP - Shut the
> frigging hell up and lets talk something operational.
>
>
>
>
> On 6/09/2016 3:02 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
>
> Yes. I've been talking to one Uni that didn't apply. They are confused why
> the others applied as well.
>
> I think serious questions need to be asked as to why the universities
> think they are entitled or even eligible to apply - and who approved them.
>
> Question. If the result of funding is public, why aren't the applications
> that funding?  Everyone else has to publicly disclose what they do in
> relation to most government funding, so why not this?
>
>
> ...Skeeve
>
> *Skeeve Stevens - Founder & The Architect* - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
> Email: skeeve at eintellegonetworks.com
> <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=skeeve@eintellegonetworks.com> ;
> Web: eintellegonetworks.com
>
> Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; Skype: skeeve ; LinkedIn: /in/skeeve
> <http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; Expert360: Profile
> <https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9> ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
>
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Chad Kelly <chad at cpkws.com.au
> <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=chad@cpkws.com.au>>
> wrote:
>
>> On 9/6/2016 12:00 PM, ausnog-request at lists.ausnog.net
>> <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=ausnog-request@lists.ausnog.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I was just having a little look at some of the data.
>>> 50% of the total pool went to three recipients.
>>>
>>> The bottom 163 (>90%) recipients between them received 20% of the pool.
>>> 10% of the pool was divided between 137 (76%) of recipients.
>>>
>>> Without mentioning names, I raised an eyebrow to see that there were
>>> exactly two, identical value grants ($265,600 each) to two entities with
>>> remarkably similar names.
>>>
>>> This is not unusual, many businesses run several companies Micron21 as
>> an example got around $50000 in grant funding split over two separate
>> companies.
>> The one I don't understand at all is all the Universities that got
>> funding, mostly because as I understood the legislation the emails that
>> were allocated to staff and students would all be classed as the inner
>> circle, or whatever it was called.
>> In other words it would be classed as internal usage, universities are
>> not selling internet access to students.
>> The only one I could understand getting funding as an ISP in the
>> education space would be the actual ISPs that provide the carrier networks
>> for the Universities such as Aarnet being the main one.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Chad Kelly
>> Manager
>> CPK Web Services
>> web www.cpkws.com.au
>> phone 03 9013 4853
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing listAusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20160906/065875b4/attachment.html>