The overall satisfaction for the service usage is positive, with all above 80% positive feedback. The most frequently used services, including "attended TWNIC conferences", "contacted customer service via email or phone", "used the RMS resource management system", "statistics of Internet Connection Bandwidth", and "IP address/ASN allocation", all received above 90% positive feedback, and the proportion of IP members rating them as "very satisfied" exceeds 40%.
In terms of service satisfaction, about 60% attributed their satisfaction to "Practical assistance is provided". "Fast customer service response" accounted for 48.4%, and "The information is helpful to me" was at 45.2%. As for "the system is easy to use and operate" (35.5%), "practical assistance is provided" (32.3%), and "IP/ASN is made available fast" (29.0%), the percentages ranged from 20 to 30% each.
| Satisfied | Vert Satisfied | |
| Attended TWNIC conferences n=14 | 50.0% | 42.9% |
| Contacted customer service via email, phone n=14 | 42.9% | 50.0% |
| Used the RMS resource management system n=13 | 30.8% | 61.5% |
| Statistics of Internet Connection Bandwidth n=12 | 58.3% | 41.7% |
| IP address/ASN allocation n=11 | 36.4% | 54.6% |
| Used the RPKI management system/RPKI Validator website n=10 | 20.0% | 60.0% |
| Read the TWNIC annual report, e-newsletter n=9 | 44.4% | 55.6% |
| Participated in TWNIC training courses n=9 | 44.4% | 55.6% |
| ISP yearbook website n=7 | 57.1% | 28.6% |
| IP membership registration/IP membership request website n=6 | 33.3% | 66.7% |
| Global IP address and AS number statistics n=6 | 66.7% | 33.3% |
| Browsed the official website or blog n=4 | 50.0% | 50.0% |
| Taiwan IPv6 Global Ranking website n=3 | 100.0% | 0.0% |
| Followed official social media, such as Facebook and Twitter n=2 | 50.0% | 50.0% |
IP members generally gave positive feedback on their overall satisfaction with the center. Considering responses of "satisfied" or "very satisfied", the satisfaction rate of "IP allocation
service" reached 93.6%, with an average score of 4.4. "Service quality" and "Technical support" achieved satisfaction rates of 87.1% and 83.9% respectively, and average scores of 4.3 and 4.2.
Service quality this year recorded a satisfaction rate of 87.1%, a decrease of 5.5% from last year (92.6%), with the proportion of "very satisfied" down by 13.7% compared to last year, yet
still higher than in 2021. Technical support, peaking at 92.6% satisfaction rate last year, saw a slight decline to 83.9% this year after a rebound last year, but it's still higher than in
2021. The satisfaction rate of IP allocation service this year was at 93.6%, slightly lower than last year, with a more significant drop (7.2%) in "very satisfied", though overall it remains
the second highest in recent years.
In addition to overall satisfaction, trustworthiness and perceived value were also included as evaluative metrics. The results are similar to the overall satisfaction. Most IP members had positive feedbacks, with trust and perceived service value receiving positive responses of 87.1% and 90.3% respectively, and average scores of 4.3 and 4.4. There was a 9.2% decrease in trust this year, with a rate of 87.1%. The proportion of members choosing "Totally agree" significantly decreased by 17.8%. The decrease in perceived value was relatively less, at around 6%, but the proportion of "Totally agree" responses also noticeably decreased by 10.9% compared to last year.
In the evaluation of the value perception of various registration services by IP registrars, the "RPKI management system/RPKI Validator website" achieved the highest value perception at 100%. Both "IP address/ASN allocation" and the "TWNIC IP Open Policy Meeting" were perceived similarly in the rate 90.9%. The "RMS resource management system" and "IP membership registration/IP membership request website" were close in perceived value, with the former having a higher "very valuable" rate at 63.6%.
For IPv4 scarce issue, the highest percentage of IP members want TWNIC to "help release unused IPv4 addresses" (58.1%), while "recovering or restoring unused IPv4 addresses" and "share ways to transfer resources" also account for about 54.8% and 22.6% respectively.
In obtaining information about TWNIC, 64.5% of IP members prefer the "official website", and 45.2% prefer "newsletters". Additionally, about 12.9% prefer "Facebook pages", and only 9.7% prefer "YouTube".
About 70% of IP members indicate that support from TWNIC is needed for IPv6 deployment, with the highest proportion (41.9%) suggesting "share cases of successful IPv6 deployment for consultation". Around 40% emphasize the need for "provide IPv6 training courses or staff training", while "Encourage knowledge sharing between member organizations regarding their experiences with IPv6 deployment" and "promote IPv6 to software/hardware or content providers" are noted by 29.0% and 22.6% respectively.
I'll say we have collaborated with TWNIC for a long time, and we have developed a tacit understanding. Like I said, there should be no problem in applying for or using its services. When we report issues to TWNIC, I feel the TWNIC people are pretty enthusiastic, proactive, and able to provide feedback in a timely manner.
What TWNIC can do is to stay true to the purpose of its establishment. It has followed APNIC in determining its operations and promoting its businesses. In fact, not much will change in the promotion of existing businesses; …since the emergence of the Internet in 1980, the business has been operated for so many years. …So, I think TWNIC has fared well in what they can do.
In our IP committee meeting last quarter, TWNIC proposed to establish a review committee, which is a reasonable committee for supervising and managing the service fees. Our committee members approved and consented to the idea, and we invited members from the industry, government, and academia who are familiar with IP distribution and accounting rules as well as representatives from relevant technical fields… to participate in the review committee.
The original management mechanism did not specify matters regarding fees. This part has now been established. …This is a very appropriate direction.
These small ISP operators may not have built RPKI validators, …we (the telecommunication companies) have mostly taken a leading role in promoting RPKI validation in coordination with the promotion effort by TWNIC, which I have mentioned earlier.
There is one issue that TWNIC might need to improve on: RPKI validation, the stability of which has room for improvement. If a router is disconnected, the RPKI validation here for us or other operators can be affected, undermining our services.
Because Taiwan is a major country of information technology, to promote its industrial development, the government should encourage or require people to fully replace their equipment so that we can promote IPV6 faster.
Our current system …is compatible to both IPv6 and IPv4. However, I have encountered customers who were unable to meet compatibility requirements …I had to make modification especially for them.