[lir-wg] Re: 50% increase in RIPE fees ? Since when ?

> Well - they did.  The mandate on the NCC was "make sure that LIRs are
> properly trained so they can do their job well" (which costs quite some
> money).  Usually this is mainly paid by the "new LIR fees" - which is
> a reasonable approach - but this year there were much less new LIRs
> than planned in the budget, so there was a net loss.

I wholeheartedly agree with training being a core activity. It reduces the
workload in the long term by not requiring quite so much handholding later.
I am not against spending money - maybe I have been misunderstood. Again.

> I think it's reasonable that the NCC plans with higher fees to ensure that
> they do not run the risk of going bankrupt - which would be a
catastrophe -
> or that they have to significantly reduce expenses like "training" - which
> is something the LIR community has been explicitely asking for.

OK. I have *not* had time since recieving the invoice yesterday to go and
read every budget report and annual report issued in 2002. I will. I cannot
comment on this directly, but I will go and look at how the costs break down
and formulate more informed opinions shortly. In the meanwhile I have asked
(too late for bureaucrats probably, but I must try) to be invoiced
quarterly, as this outrageous increase screws my cashflow for the next year.
I am *not* in this for business or profit - like I have said I am supporting
a leftover, legacy network and not-quite breaking even.

> (Of course the "training" thing is just an example - but I still feel
> they are doing a reasonable job, and the costs are still in the range
> that they don't overload a commercial ISP's budget.  For a non-commercial
> network and non-educational network, one has to face the question "is it
> necessary to be a LIR?")

For the last question, and for my circumstances, yes. There is not other way
to get independent access to AS number(s) and address space. I have been
royally screwed in the past (in different jobs, mind) by ISPs using the PA
renumbering 'costs' to force retention of otherwise un-economic business. In
terms of resilience - if that is your chosen route - BGP is essential, even
if at the moment my specific circumstances dictate that I only have one
puclic upstream (my private peering is my own affair). Relying on a
'foreign' LIR to issue and maintain an as-num or other RIPE objects is too
risky.

So, in my opinion, the RIPE fees have been worth the reduction of risk.
Maybe now it is changing. I will be looking into the process of mergers and
acquisitions through RIPE to see if there is a goal I can pursue to become
an ex-LIR (much to the relief of some I suspect).

Peter