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

On 22/09/16 21:56, Bastien Schils wrote:
> /Surprisingly/, the main argument from the "big old ones" is: That's how
> we've always been doing.
> Ever heard of the experiment about some monkeys, a ladder and a water hose?
>
> We just got our /22, and we are not going to need any more IPv4 in a
> foreseeable future. IPv6 is the way. We know, we got it, we agree.
>
> *But* I do agree that it is unfair that our fee is the same as some LIR
> that own/hoard/have so many more resources than us.
> The people telling us to switch to IPv6 are the ones who run all their
> networks on IPv4 and thus making IPv6 spread slower.
>

That's probably the biggest nonsense I've heard in quite a while.

First of all, the people, that tell you to switch IPv6 are the ones, 
that have rolled out v6 years ago, not the ones, that run their 
infrastructure on IPv4.

Secondly, RIPE used to charge based on amount of ressources. It was 
since changed. Now you want it changed back.

If you for example changed to the old charging scheme you'd also hurt 
the ones, that came a bit later to the game.

As we progressed towards the end, the standard allocation was decreased. 
So members, who got allocations later on, would have more prefixes of 
smaller sizes and would have requested prefixes more often. These paid 
more than those with one large prefix for example, because of the amount 
of individual prefixes.

No matter how you change it, somebody will always feel treated unfair.

Kind regards,
Martin List-Petersen--
Airwire Ltd. - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair
http://www.airwire.ie
Phone: 091-865 968
Registered Office: Moy, Kinvara, Co. Galway, 091-865 968 - Registered in 
Ireland No. 508961