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

Sorry for quoting in line and multiple snips...

On Jul 14, 2012, at 3:29 PM, Lu Heng wrote:
> Argument 1: fees should related to Ripe NCC workload rather than
> address distribution.(in the sense that Ripe NCC is in fact NOT RIPE,
> it is just a secretary service offered to people who need help from
> the community, the more help you have, the more you pay).

Besides the fact that I disagree on the workload model as a principle,  
I think that the argument is biased in any case and I give an example:  
our LIR exists since 2003, until now we paid about 16500 euros of  
fees. I count 9 "tickets" opened on our side.

What is the case among the following in your opinion ? :
1 - The average processing cost of one ticket at RIPE is about 2000  
euros.
2 - We are an unfortunate case
3 - The system does NOT reflect the workload created by LIRs

I vote #3 and I suspect the situation is similar for most "median" LIRs.

<snip>
> So most small LIR(2048 address) will pay ...74 Euro/year. and if you
> are media LIR(with /16), you will pay... 2405 Euro/year.
>
> And if you are large LIR(people with /8), then you will pay
> 615723.8272Euro/year(for people agree on argument two, companies in
> real world with over /8, of course should be very well above millions
> income level, so it shouldn't be a problem for them).


This would make a lot of sense in my opinion, even though I disagree  
with the confusion between a "median" LIR and a "a LIR with a number  
of allocated IPv4 addresses corresponding to the mean (which is about  
50k)". As the distribution is Paretian you can bet that the large  
majority of LIRs have far less than the "average" number of IP  
addresses.

Does exist somewhere a table reporting for each RIPE member the  
allocated resources (IPv4, IPv6, ASn, Allocations, Assignments,  
Routes, etc) ?

> However, please note, if a charging model based on IP address number
> is being done, then the total Ripe expenditure might increase due tax
> changes. Let's say the premiums are 50% additional cost. For small
> LIRs, they will pay 130Euro a year, for media, it will be 3700 euro a
> year, and for real large ones, it will be around 1 millions euro a
> year.

This would still make sense, even though I am convinced that project a  
tax of 50% of the raw operating income is a bit exaggerated. Make it  
50% of the EBIT (which should be close to zero in any case).

Should even the numbers you expose be all correct (and as said I have  
some objection, but I might be wrong) instead of speaking of  
"small"/"media"/"large" out it in this way: Who holds less than about  
20K-30K allocated IPs wouls pay less, who holds more would pay more,  
for who is in that range it would not change much. I think that the  
majority of LIRs would agree.

Last word... all the above is just IMHO.

You are completely right stating that when we do not show up at the  
meetings and we do not participate we are in fault by definition.

Regards,

A.