[members-discuss] billing problem on multiple lir accounts.

Perhaps a RIPE policy should be modified so there is no financial
incentive to find loopholes and try to game the system, so this
unwanted behavior would stop.

For example, one-time sign-up fee for every new LIR could be bumped
up, so that it is (for example) 50% more expensive than buying 
average /22 of IPv4 on the open market. 
(it could updated once a year or so if needed)

Optionally, this one-time price could be significantly reduced if new
LIR forfeits its /22 of IPv4 from RIPE (opting instead to get smaller
range elsewhere or even eventually go IPv6 only)

If new LIR is in it for legit business, it won't be such a big deal
(especially as all other similar competitors on the market will have
to do the same). But if they want to become LIR *ONLY* so they buy
and resold IPv4 addressspace for profit, it won't be interesting to
them anymore. It also shouldn't case problems for existing members
(as it won't affect them).

Regards,
Matija

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:27:40AM +0100, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote:
> * Angelo Broccoli <angelo.broccoli at topnet.it> [2019-01-09 11:10]:
> > I do.
> > 
> > we are undergoing the same request due a resource trasfer with the offering
> > parties that's going to close.
> 
> Yes some people do, but we have over 20k LIRs. That means in
> perspective that very few people are complaining. I'm not saying noone
> does.
> 
> Many of those that complain (and I'm not saying you are one of them)
> are complaining because then want more IPv4 space for cheap/free which
> is simply not possible. They can go to the open market or accept that
> there simply isn't enough and think about how to manage that.
> 
> Instead we have this tiresome discussions every bloody time there is a
> change to close loopholes that these marvelous entrepreneurs try to
> use.
> 
> Regards
> Sebastian

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.