[members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010

* Sven Olaf Kamphuis:

> furthermore it's wrong that IP space is hereby assigned a monetary value,
> as the sole function of LIRs is to distribute that IP space to end-users,
> RIPE already gets plenty of cash from the LIRs just for being a LIR,
> requesting additional payment for PI space registrations is pretty much
> against the whole existing points-billing-model.

The fee is just a kludge to make sure that RIPE can recover the
resource when the assignee lost interest in it.

> Instead of asking 50 euros per assignment per ??year/month/cow/whatever??,
> it would make more sense to check if assignments are actually
> announced and if they are not, delete them after 3 years or so.

RIPE policies separate address assignment from (capital-I Internet)
routing, so this can't work.

> also with the introduction of 32 bit AS numbers and IPv6 neither PI space,
> nor AS numbers are going to run out anywhere within our life time, so
> actually i don't see the point of even keeping them linked to the current
> points system at all, let alone introduce new fees.

There are two opposing opinions on this matter.  One side claims we're
moving towards scarce resources.  The other side claims exactly the
opposite.  (I'm siding with the latter.)

We should move this discussion to the address-policy working group
mailing list, but I think the topic has already been hashed out over
there.

-- 
Florian Weimer                <fweimer at bfk.de>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH       http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100              tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe             fax: +49-721-96201-99