[members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nigel Titley
nigel at titley.com
Sat Jan 24 23:53:52 CET 2015
Sergey On 22/01/15 23:36, sergey myasoedov wrote: > Nigel, Sander, > > I would rather prefer option 2: > >> 2. The Board could take a two-step approach to the Charging Scheme. In >> May, members would vote on individual issues such as charging for ASNs. >> The result of the voting would then be used to create a Charging Scheme >> that would be voted on in the usual way by members at the November GM. > This approach is more balanced as for me and it allows to produce the charging scheme > proposal that is better reflect the expectation of members. > > By the way, does the Board have any financial appraisal of proposed amendment of the > Charging Scheme? Not entirely sure I understand what you mean here. We always, of course, do a financial appraisal of any action, including the charging scheme. Nigel
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]