[members-discuss] Regarding RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2020 - Two Options to Vote On

Hi,

On 4/17/19 13:02, REG ID: pl.skonet wrote:
> Dear RIPE,
>
> Who asked about "volume" (quotes intentional) charging?

I'm also interested to know who asked for the change of the charging 
scheme and how has the RIPE NCC Board reached to the two options that 
are now proposed.


The second option, option B, is not really a volume charging scheme. It 
penalizes those that have received multiple smaller allocations instead 
of a larger one. It also penalizes whoever decides to transfer parts of 
an allocation. For example, let's say an LIR has a /16 allocation - it 
would pay the €1150 + €50. Let's now say that one of their customers 
really can not renumber and wants to buy the /24 they are using. Once 
the transfer is complete the LIR will now have several allocations 
(/17+/18+/19+/20+/21+/22+/23+/24) and will end up paying €1150 + €400.

Why is this "volume" charging scheme not taking into account the number 
of IPs (which would make a lot more sense) an LIR has allocated and 
instead it looks at the arbitrary number of allocations? Has the Board 
analyzed what would happen if an LIR decides to complain that before 
2012 the IP Resource Analyst that looked at his request decided to 
allocate several smaller blocks instead of the large block it was asking 
for.


I think (and I believe I have heard one board member saying) that this 
proposal of a charging scheme was made SPECIFICALLY to create noise and 
guide members to vote for no change. If we are given options, why not 
multiple where some may make sense instead of 2 options (one where 
nothing changes, second - poorly designed - where everyone will be 
unhappy and thus nobody will vote for). Please see below.

I really want to hear from the Board and understand how and why they 
have reached the conclusion that these are the only two options they 
will propose the membership to vote on.

>
> First of all, please submit a plan to spend the huge amount of extra 
> money you will get from option B. Today, you give the members a 
> surplus from the annual budget, because you are not able to spend 
> everything that you collect. I am definitely against option B.
>
> Please keep charging scheme as is.

If I be asked to vote for one of these two options I'll also vote for 
the charging scheme to be kept as is.

I have mentioned a few ideas to a few of the Board members - ideas that 
have been dismissed completely as far as I can see :(

Why is the board not proposing a charging scheme that charges every PI 
holder €100 or even up to €400 every year - in order to decrease the LIR 
membership fee with a few hundred €?

Why isn't the board talking about the removal of the difference in price 
between PA and PI? If both PA and PI would cost the same, many PI 
holders will decide to become members and the RIPE NCC would then be 60k 
members strong instead of 20k.

Why is it that every time a new charging scheme is proposed, we are not 
consulted? Even if, let's say, my idea would not be accepted, I'd like 
to see it as one of the several options presented to members. At least 
it would get dismissed by the membership and not by the board (who 
apparently does not want anything to change).

Last question is related to the sign-up fee. We are nearing IPv4 
depletion (haven't I heard this before, like a dozen times since 2012?) 
and the number of members will start to decline significantly once the 
RIPE NCC can no longer allocate IPv4. Why is the board keeping the €2000 
sign-up fee in the charging scheme? What's the use of the sign-up fee 
right now and what will be it's use once the RIPE NCC can not allocate 
IPv4 any longer? Isn't this €2000 sign-up fee one of the barriers 
forcing potential members into buying IPv4 PI?

You'll say that people will get /22s from the RIPE NCC quicker/cheaper 
if they could setup an LIR for just €1400/year. Well, I agree with you, 
but let's see if this €2000 sign-up fee still makes sense once the RIPE 
NCC can not allocate IPv4 any longer.

my 2 cents,

elvis

-- 
Elvis Daniel Velea
V4Escrow LLC
Chief Executive Officer
E-mail: elvis at v4escrow.net
Mobile: +1 (702) 970 0921