AW: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010

So that would be an easy one:

To receive provider-independent resources get into contract with RIPE-NCC. Without any other way.

Only problem with this 'Direct End User Assignment' is the horrible, far to high fee NCC want's to invoice.

My theory: our dear hostmasters don't want to have the typical end-user hassle themselves and simply go for keeping that which has been made possible by 2007-01 far away by simply setting the fee high enough.

Being forced to have a LIR handle a independent resource makes that resource dependent.


just my 2c.

Marcus

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering IP Services

Versatel West GmbH

Unterste-Wilms-Strasse 29
D-44143 Dortmund

Fon: +49-(0)231-399-4486 | Fax: +49-(0)231-399-4491
marcus.gerdon at versatel.de | www.versatel.de

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Dortmund | Registergericht: Dortmund HRB 21738 
Geschäftsführer: Marc Lützenkirchen, Dr. Hai Cheng, Dr. Max Padberg, Peter Schindler
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 AS8881 / AS8638 / AS13270 | MG3031-RIPE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: members-discuss-admin at ripe.net 
> [mailto:members-discuss-admin at ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Geraint Evans
> Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Juni 2009 11:13
> An: Jon Morby; lir at uralttk.ru
> Cc: Sven Olaf Kamphuis; Martin List-Petersen; lir at uralttk.ru; 
> Sven Olaf Kamphuis; members-discuss at ripe.net
> Betreff: RE: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
> 
> The simple fact of the matter is PI space is not effectively 
> being controlled. 
> 
> RIPE need to take control of it so that we don't have the 
> same problems with IPv6 as we do now with IPv4.
> 
> PI space has been passed to end users, and because its P.I no 
> one is really maintaining who has what and what it is being used for.
> 
> By making LIR's responsible for the relationship with the end 
> user of the P.I a reclamation can be easily achieved - if 
> needed, I don't agree with the charging but I do agree with 
> making whoever requested the P.I space on behalf of a client 
> responsible.
> 
> 
> Geraint 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-discuss-admin at ripe.net 
> [mailto:members-discuss-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Jon Morby
> Sent: 19 June 2009 09:29
> To: lir at uralttk.ru
> Cc: Sven Olaf Kamphuis; Martin List-Petersen; lir at uralttk.ru; 
> Sven Olaf Kamphuis; members-discuss at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
> 
> And sadly it is a precedent ... EUR50 this year .... EUR500 the year  
> after ... EUR5000 the year after that ??
> 
> Once it has been agreed in principal that we RIPE should start  
> charging for an assignment, it is then possible for "the few" 
> who are  
> able to make it to these RIPE jollies^Wmeetings all over Europe and  
> steer the policies then do so to their best interests.
> 
> We've seen this recently with Nominet in the UK where by they 
> now have  
> 2 tiers of access, and it is no longer a "level playing 
> field" for all  
> members .. you have members, and you have "elite" members
> 
> I totally agree that RIPE have been needlessly steering 
> everyone into  
> becoming an LIR when they only need a small assignment, and this has  
> lead to a waste of IP allocations .. however my understanding 
> is that  
> this policy isn't designed to limit PA space assignments 
> anyway ... it  
> is designed to make PI harder to obtain, thus steering yet 
> more people  
> into the LIR route (whether they need to be an LIR or not) ...
> 
> How many LIRs find RIPE referring customers to them because they  
> needed an assignment?  Few I suspect - they all either get told "go  
> find one from this list" or otherwise "become an LIR" and pay the  
> small LIR fee.
> 
> Maybe its just me only seeing the glass as half full?
> 
> Jon
> 
> On 19 Jun 2009, at 09:16, Heidrich Attila wrote:
> 
> > I think you do.
> >
> > Consider the domain registration. The registrator is kinda "service
> > provider" whether it serves any kind of 
> access/hosting/content/DNS or
> > whatever, and the end user is the only "independent" user 
> of the named
> > resource - but not owner.
> >
> > I think this is very similar to the PI assignments. In 
> Hungary this is
> > normal the regitrstor having a one time enrollment feer, a 
> yearly fee
> > (well, this contains registration fees for the whole amount), and
> > per-transaction fees after all new registration, transfers, and
> > prolongals.
> >
> > I do not think EUR50 to be so big problem, but we are an ISP, so  
> > this is
> > quite normal for us to have the customer pay after allocating  
> > resources
> > of any kind.
> >
> > Attila
> >
> > -----Eredeti üzenet-----
> >
> >> Not every LIR is an ISP, a lot of them are. If you assign PI to  
> >> somebody
> >> else, you have a provider/enduser relationship. That makes you a  
> >> service
> >> provider of some sort. Be it internet, content or hosting.
> >
> > no, you dont.
> >
> > the customer usually asks to just register ip space and an 
> AS number  
> > which
> > he then announces himself to transits of -his- choice.
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------
> > Ezen uzenet kizarolag a cimzettjenek szol es olyan bizalmas jellegu
> > informaciokat tartalmazhat, amelyek feltarasat jogszabaly vagy  
> > szerzodes
> > tiltja. Amennyiben a jelen uzenetet On teves kezbesites 
> folytan kapta,
> > kerjuk haladektalanul ertesitsen bennunket es az uzenetet annak
> > csatolmanyaival egyutt torolje. Amennyiben On nem cimzettje a jelen
> > uzenetnek, annak es mellekleteinek elolvasasa, masolasa,  
> > tovabbitasa, vagy
> > barmely celbol torteno felhasznalasa szigoruan tilos. 
> Megjegyezzuk,  
> > hogy az
> > e-mail utjan torteno kozlesek nem garantaljak az elkuldott uzenetek
> > bizalmas jellegenek es teljessegenek megorzeset, valamint 
> az uzenetek
> > megfelelo kezbesiteset. A fentieken tulmenoen, a Hungarian 
> Telephone  
> > and
> > Cable Corp., annak kapcsolt vallalkozasai, illetve az altaluk  
> > megbizott
> > harmadik felek a jelen e-mail cimrol kuldott, vagy arra 
> erkezo barmely
> > uzenetet ellenorizhetnek, lemasolhatnak, felhasznalhatnak vagy  
> > harmadik fel
> > reszere tovabbithatnak.
> >
> > This message is intended exclusively for its addressee and 
> may contain
> > confidential information protected from disclosure by law or  
> > contract. If
> > you have received this message in error, please immediately notify  
> > us and
> > delete it together with its attachments. If you are not an 
> addressee  
> > of
> > this message, reading, copying, distribution or use for any 
> purpose  
> > of the
> > contents of this message or its attachments is strictly forbidden.
> > Additionally, please note that communication by email guarantees  
> > neither
> > the confidentiality nor the completeness or proper receipt of the  
> > messages
> > sent. Furthermore, Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp., its  
> > affiliates and
> > third parties retained by them may monitor, copy, use or 
> forward to  
> > third
> > parties any outgoing messages from and incoming messages to 
> this email
> > address.
> >
> 
>