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

On 09/21/2016 02:46 PM, Muntasir.Ali at newham.gov.uk wrote:
> As a non-profit LIR with a /16 Legacy IPv4 address space, and only Legacy space within IPv4, we would be opposed to any charging models based on size of IP allocations, especially those which include Legacy space within consideration of calculating what is charged.  This is considering that many (not all) of the proposed "solutions" may make it more expensive or infeasible for us to retain membership were they implemented as described.

There is a big difference between disliking a proposal just because it 
is more expensive to you, and it really being infeasible for any 
organisation.

What if the price difference was not exactly proportional, but more 
modest, based on categories, like other NCCs have.
E.g. similar to ARIN where a provider with a /22 pays $ 500, and one 
with a /16 $ 4000

Would you still take advantage of the loophole you have as legacy 
holder, and go through the trouble of setting up another LIR for your 
IPv6, just to save +/- 3k?

And how many legacy holders with no other IPv4 space does RIPE actually 
have?


Yours sincerely,

Floris Bos