[members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model

Sorry to say but I really don't think you are seeing the picture.

I fail to see how dropping yearly fee's, increasing 'setup' fee's will 
accomplish anything. Perhaps spend some time and do the math out and put 
an actual outline with some numbers behind it and then match that upto 
the required budget to operate RIPE.

You specifically say this:

"After the membership has approved the new plan via a majority vote 
there will be an excess in money available due to the higher setup fee. 
The price will be determined by availability."

RIPE having an 'excess' of money, will simply mean that money is 
returned to its members. The price is not determined by availability of 
resources, it is determined primarily by the operating costs of RIPE its 
self.

Specifically lets look at the Articles of Association that govern RIPE.


      Article 3 – The Association: Objective

The objective of the Association is to perform activities for the 
benefit of the Members, primarily activities that the Members need to 
organize as a group. This object can be sub-divided into the following 
activities:

  * Registration Activities related to the role of the Association as
    Regional Internet Registry;
  * Co-ordination Activities, including the support of the stable
    operation of the Internet;
  * Administration Activities, including all regular reports and
    administrative support as well as all other general administrative
    tasks which cannot be attributed to a specific activity;
  * New Activities, including all activities which are necessary to
    react to the rapidly changing world of the Internet; and to do all
    that is connected therewith or may be conducive thereto, all this in
    the widest sense of the word. *Making profit is not an object of the
    Association.*


So if RIPE cannot make a profit, then it is impossible for it to set 
fee's so high that would make any impact and thus limits the whole game 
to a 21,000,000 million EUR bubble, which is TINY compared to some of 
the power house IT companies budgets.




On 09/16/2016 06:55 AM, Prager-IT e.U. wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Daniel Pearson 
> <daniel at privatesystems.net <mailto:daniel at privatesystems.net>> wrote:
>
>     On 09/16/2016 05:57 AM, Prager-IT e.U. wrote:
>>     The plan I envision is quite simple, move from the current
>>     Flatrate charging scheme to a system that charges members an
>>     amount for the resources they are using. This will ensure that
>>     each and every RIPE NCC member will pay their fair share.
>>
>>
>>     1. Charge per allocated IPv4 address with a linear system.
>>
>>     price_per_ipv4 = required_budget / amount_of_addresses_in_use
>>     your_yearly_membership_fee = amount_of_ipv4_you_use * price_per_ipv4
>>
>
>     Did you happen to read my reply to the thread. This is going to
>     equate to almost no resources left as a /22 will cost roughly 24
>     EUR per year.
>
>
> I read everything said so far, to prevent this from happening we also 
> need to increase the setup fee as I already outlined.
>
>
>>     This will also apply to Provider Independent(PI) assignemnts,
>>     anycasting assignments and Legacy Internet Resources registered
>>     via a sponsoring Local Internet Registry(LIR).
>
>     You're going to be hard pressed to charge Legacy resource holders,
>     BUT, even if you did, my above figure of a /22 costing 24EUR would
>     probably be cut down to 16 EUR or less
>
>
> If the resources are sponsored via a sponsoring Local Internet 
> Registry(LIR) I don't see why we should not be able to charge the 
> Legacy resource holders.
>
>
>>
>>     IPv6 PI assignments and IPv6 IXP assigments will remain unchanged
>>     at 50,-- Euros per year.
>
>     Moot point here since the number of IPV6 resources avail.
>
>
> The goal is to provide a comprehensive plan for the membership to vote 
> on. The way I see this needs to be in addressed as well in order for 
> that to happen.
>
>
>>
>>     If we ever reach a point where IPv4 becomes obsolete revert back
>>     to a Flatrate System as due to the nature of IPv6 a Flatrate
>>     system is a fair choice.
>>
>>
>>     2. Increase the Setup Fee to an amount that reflects the current
>>     reality of the transfer market, 6.000,-- Euros.
>
>     Read the 2015 Budget, they collected slightly over 5 Million EUR
>     in setup fee's, which got dispersed back to its members as a
>     credit on next years bill, increasing the setup fee will simply
>     act to lower, even further, the yearly cost. In 2015 Each LIR
>     would have received 'roughly' a 415 EUR credit on their bill... So
>     we might as well just not charge for IPv4 upto a /19 , and if
>     you're going to up the setup fee's then we might as well make that
>     a free /18.
>
>
> I am well aware of the numbers. Under my plan there most likely would 
> never be any sum significant enough to disperse.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>     3. Introduce an Inter-RIR Transfer Fee for resources that leave
>>     the RIPE Region so people don't flee with their resources into a
>>     cheaper Region, 3,-- Euros per IPv4 address.
>
>     If you do this, then it's a two way street. Not to mention that in
>     the growing global age, you can't tell me every IP being routed to
>     the ripe region is under RIPEs control. By adding additional
>     hurdles folks will simply ignore, and announce their space
>     globally from the originating RIR more so than they currently do now.
>
>
> The goal of the change is to prevent people from fleeing with their 
> resources allocated by the RIPE NCC from fleeing into cheaper regions 
> after the new charging scheme has been approved.
>
> I am confused as to why you are going on about where resources are 
> being announced from.
>
>
>>
>>
>>     4. Buy Back IPv4 resources and return them to the free pool with
>>     any excess money from members that are willing to give back
>>     resources.
>
>     With what money are these bought back and at what price? Only to
>     re-assign at a financial loss and then have to buy it back again?
>     Grand scheme of things, everybody here is ignoring the fact that,
>     with basically 21,000,000 EUR budget to disperse between all LIR's
>     in RIPE you aren't going to change the world. Aside from a lot of
>     keyboard warriors pounding away with random ideas that have no
>     factual backings this thread accomplishes nothing.
>
>
> After the membership has approved the new plan via a majority vote 
> there will be an excess in money available due to the higher setup 
> fee. The price will be determined by availability.
>
> Again, I am well aware of the numbers it just seems that you are 
> unable to see the picture yet.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan Prager
>
> --
> Prager-IT e.U.
> VAT Number: ATU69773505
> Austrian Company Register: 438885w
>
> Skype: Prager-IT
> contact at prager-it.com <mailto:contact at prager-it.com>
> +43 680 300 99 80 <tel:%2B43%20680%20300%2099%2080>
> +44 20 376 962 11
>
>
>
> ----
> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss
> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page:
> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/
>
> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20160916/97783f82/attachment.html>