[members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC website becoming HTTPS-only
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
ripe-md at c4inet.net
Mon Jan 26 14:45:51 CET 2015
Please note I'm only addressing the matter of ASN charges here, the merit of 2014-03 itself are probably better discussed in address-policy. On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 01:14:37PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote: >this isn't just about GC; it's about a lot of things, including: > >- allowing the ASN assignment process to become far simpler and more >transparent than it currently is IME, as soon as money is involved, things get more complicated (at least for a LIR) and less automatable. >- creating a mechanism to help prevent hoarding of resources A numerical or time-based limit would provide that and would be automatable. >- aligning RIPE NCC policy with existing RIPE community policy 2007-01 applies and, IIRC, it does not demand that money change hands. >- ensuring that end users of PI resources cover the costs of running their >share of the registry End Users don't have a share. They don't have a vote. No taxation without representation. >- ensuring that there is a mechanism to encourage end users to return >unused ASNs to the RIPE NCC. Is there any data on how effective the EUR50 charge for PI has been in that? I think an annual (automated) "audit" of independent resources would be better in providing this function... rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC website becoming HTTPS-only
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]