[address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)

Hi Tore,

>>> I also note that the Impact Analysis warns that this policy may lead
>> >to increased fees for members, which would be an undesirable
>> >consequence. I don't feel that the members should be sponsoring the
>> >non-members; equal access to addresses from the last /8 should mean
>> >equal monetary contribution to the NCC.
>
>> Does that mean that you want the sponsored PI assignments get the same
>> cost as a direct assignment (1300 euro yearly maintenance per
>> object) ?

>Yes, something along those lines would be good.

Perhaps an easier way of dealing with something like a price point or cost in that case, is to not allow LIR Sponsored IPv4 PI from the last /8.

Which would result in only having the option of either becoming a LIR or sign a direct end-user agreement with RIPE.

Regards,
Erik