[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
ripe-md at c4inet.net
Tue Mar 24 18:00:18 CET 2015
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 04:04:07PM +0100, Sander Steffann wrote: >Hi, > >> Could you clarify what policy you are referring to? > >The 2007-01 policy proposal that introduced it for all independent resources: IPv4, IPv6 and ASNs. 2007-01 called for a charge for PI resources, in the case of ASNs, the Board has decided - and the membership has voted for some years now - to set this charge at zero. I don't want a situation where policy determines the charges the members have to pay. This should always be a decision of the board and the membership. rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]