This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[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 ]
Wolfgang Nagele (ARI Registry Services)
wolfgang.nagele at ariservices.com
Wed Mar 25 02:05:32 CET 2015
Hi, A charge per ASN is, from my point of view, not a very effective garbage collection mechanism. Fully agree with Elvis here. The fee would have to be quite substantial for this goal to be met. The majority of resource holders won’t even think twice if the fee is a few hundred Euros. Garbage collection should be enforced by clear requirements and audit of those. Discussing if this is value for money should be a consideration as well. Clean is not necessarily the same as most efficient ... Cheers, Wolfgang -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20150325/6084f962/attachment.html>
- 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 ]