[members-discuss] Proposal for New RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model

On 09/07/2012 14:23, Nigel Titley wrote:
> The Executive Board will be meeting again in early August 2012 to 
> finalise the proposal that will be presented for a formal vote at the 
> RIPE NCC General Meeting 2012. We urge you to send us any comments or 
> concerns you have about the proposed model by the end of July. Please 
> send your feedback on this proposal to the members-discuss mailing list 
> (members-discuss at ripe.net).

1. you haven't included any sort of charging levels for any of the
categories.  I don't really think it's possible to give much feedback
without at least some idea of where the knife will fall.

2. The document notes the following:

> For the initial year of the proposed Charging Scheme, the Executive
> Board proposes to set the membership categories based on the 2012 size
> categories.  [Extra Small becomes “Small”; Small and Medium become
> “Regular”; and Large and Extra Large become “Large”].

As it stands, if a new LIR requests ipv4 x /21 and ipv6 x /32 (i.e. the
minimum you can really get away with for a LIR internet presence), then
they are categorised as "small" rather than "extra small".

The current calculation model is here:

> http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/member-support/info/billing/how-to-calculate-a-billing-score

If this proposal goes through as-is, it means that all LIRs with minimum
resource allocation will jolted up a second level to medium for the first
year of this new scheme.

So any tiny LIR which started out in the early 2000s and got themselves a
single v4 + v6 allocation has been categorised as "small" rather than
"extra small" since then, and will be categorised as medium for the first
year when the new charging scheme comes in.  This is regardless of the
number of assignments made from this address space.  I.e. it is regardless
of the amount of resourcing it requires from the RIPE NCC's point of view.

I find this to be bizarre.

3. I'm not getting why members will be able to select their own billing
category.  This will cause almost everyone to select "small", which will
end up skewing the billing model to overcharge for genuinely small members.

I'm thinking "bizarre" on this one too.

Nick