[members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010

Salut, Martin,

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:59:47 +0100, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> Again. Differentiate between RIPE and the RIPE NCC. RIPE is the LIR
> membership. The RIPE NCC handles the ressources and actions the
> policies, that have been worked out by the RIPE membership (the LIRs).

Of course, sorry.

> I'd say with a contractual relationship, there's actually certainty.
> Because before that, if you had PI and ASN ressources from a LIR that
> has gone bust, you'd never know how long you'd keep them after the
> other ressources are returned due to liquidation.
> 
> Now there is at least a clear procedure and you can even choose to
> have a relationship with the RIPE NCC and not a LIR. It just has a
> price tag.

That's perfectly fine with me (except that I think exceptions should be
made for organizations like SwissIX). I am merely suggesting that there
are going to be problems with the fact that these fees are also
going to be applied to existing assignments, and that "IP addresses are
not property" may not be the opinion a judge chooses to share.

As I said before, the RIPE NCC is no legislative power.

But I guess there really is no need to debate that, it's more like a
"sit back and watch" situation.

Kind regards,

				Tonnerre
-- 
SyGroup GmbH
Tonnerre Lombard

Solutions Systematiques
Tel:+41 61 333 80 33		Güterstrasse 86
Fax:+41 61 383 14 67		4053 Basel
Web:www.sygroup.ch		tonnerre.lombard at sygroup.ch
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20090619/f45b9d6e/attachment.sig>