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

Il 17/07/2012 17:17, Gert Doering ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:12:27PM +0200, Paolo Di Francesco wrote:
>> well I think that IPv4 address space percentage allocation will not
>> change in the next 5 years
> True, but that's not related to the cost of the RIPE NCC anymore, so
> why should it be relevant to the costs paid?

So, is all budget of RIPE used for managing IPv6, new members and 
trouble tickets?

Is RIPE not having servers and bandwidth to manage IPv4 services, PA, 
AS, routes, and so on?

It would be nice to have an analytic view of the budget, and see how 
much is spent for seminars, how much for accounting, and how much for 
servers and bandwith.

I see big LIR start from the point of view that public IPv4 resources 
are free for them, and IPv6 will be free as well.

Why IPv6 resources should be free? IPv4 should cost more than IPv6, but 
IPv6 resources MUST be payed according to usage.

So, I agree an accounting/seminars fee should be the same for all, but 
IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, as well as AS, PA, PI should be charged for 
quantity.

RIPE budget spent for accounting and seminars should be payed the same 
from all LIRs, and the remaining part of budget should be charged over 
resources usage.

Regards,

Tonino

> Gert Doering
>          -- NetMaster