RIPE NCC Fees for 1996

  > Peter Dawe <peter at unipalm.pipex.com> writes:
  > COuld we have some guidance as to what determines the status of

Current guidance: 

 - Compare your category with that of others you know.
   You may want to consult ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/registries.

 - Ask the NCC for individual guidance. We have a pretty good 
   estimation of the load produced by each registry. We just do
   not have it quantified.

  > > 			Small		ECU 1500.- / year
  > > 			Medium		ECU 4500.- / year
  > > 			Large		ECU 8500.- / year
  > > 			Supernational	multiples of ECU 
  > 8500.- / year
  > 
  > Can I suggest using either the number of name registration processed 

It will be quite difficult to determine that because 

	a) the RIPE NCC is not involved in name registrations,
	   these are handled by TLD registrars.

	b) name registrations are made by individual organisations
           and not by ISPs

  > ( or 
  > the number of routes registered in the RIPE registry ) in the 3 months up 
  > to 30th Nov 1995.

The number of routes registered is not a good measurement either, since it
is not absolutely required for anything and charging based on it would 
just be a disincentive to register valuable information. 
Also people could register their routes in other RRs.

  > Could you publish the distribution of these so that we can determine the 
  > break points for these charges.

If I knew a readily available variable that would produce a fair 
distribution of the NCC's operating costs I would have proposed it.
I do not know one. 
Of course we will be happy to publish statistics of any kind if the 
data is readily available and can be processed with reasonable effort.

There is absolutely no offense intended in this message, just clarification.
I am just too short of time to formulate more politely.

Daniel