[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andrejs Guba
andrejs.guba at lvnet.lv
Fri Apr 14 17:57:16 CEST 2023
Hello, As far as i understand there is also option number 4 (if you decide not to choose any of A/B/C), which will kep everything like it is now. But somehow it is not widely discussed and might be not obvious to members. Andrey > Hello, > > It's great to see that member feedback has been taken into account when > developing these models. However, I would like to reiterate my concerns > regarding Model C and propose that it should be excluded from the final > selection. > > In summary, Model C introduces transfer fees, which, as I mentioned > earlier, bring potential challenges, such as unpredictability in the > RIPE NCC's annual budget, payment difficulties for sanctioned countries, > increased administrative burdens, complexities related to PI blocks and > ASNs transfers, etc. These factors could negatively affect the RIPE NCC > and its members. > > Considering the potential issues with Model C, I suggest that focusing > on Models A and B would be a more reasonable approach. Both models > provide sufficient options for the members and maintain their respective > merits without the risks associated with Model C. > > By excluding Model C from the final proposals, the voting process will > be more focused, enabling members to make a well-informed decision > between the two remaining models. This strategy would prevent Model C > from diluting the decision-making process and ensure the adoption of a > more suitable and sustainable charging scheme. > > Furthermore, Model B represents a familiar charging scheme for the > members, ensuring stability and continuity. In contrast, Model A offers > an alternative, category-based system catering to the diverse needs of > the membership base, promoting fairness and adaptability within the RIPE > NCC community. > > Model C, on the other hand, only adds uncertainty by introducing > transfer fees, which could negatively affect the RIPE NCC's financial > stability. As this model doesn't provide any significant benefits over > Models A and B, it would be more advantageous to concentrate on refining > Models A and B, ensuring a well-balanced charging scheme for the RIPE > NCC community. > > Regards, > Victor > > >> Dear RIPE NCC members, >> >> I want to thank all those who contributed to the consultation so far on >> the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 and the model we should use for the >> coming years. >> >> We can now share three draft models that we developed based on input >> from the members on the Members Discuss mailing list and in the Charging >> Scheme Open House, as well as from the discussions at the recent >> Executive Board Meeting. >> >> The result is that we are proposing three draft charging scheme models: >> one category-based and two that are based on the previous "one LIR >> account, one fee" model. We hope to receive feedback on these models by >> 19 April so the Executive Board can propose the final versions on 26 >> April. The members will then vote on those three models at the upcoming >> General Meeting on 24-26 May. >> >> The three models all aim to fulfil a budget that is roughly the same as >> 2023 plus general cost increases including inflation, so EUR 42-45 >> million. By doing this, we can ensure that we can meet the potential >> budgetary requirements for 2024 while retaining the option for members >> to redistribute any excess contributions should we receive excess funds. >> The Activity Plan and Budget will be discussed with members this coming >> Autumn. >> >> The three models are available to review at: >> https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/charging-scheme-2024-consultation >> >> We also provide an updated calculator where members can see for >> themselves how much they might pay under the draft models: >> https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/new-calculator-charging-scheme-2024.xlsx >> >> To summarise the main features of the three models: >> >> Model A - Category Model >> >> This model has ten categories to provide greater granularity. It also >> charges separately for independent and legacy resources in exactly the >> same way as in previous years. Additionally, a separate 50 EUR ASN >> assignment fee has been added. Both separately charged resources do not >> contribute to the category scores. This means there is no double >> charging and no specific charging for transfers or administrative work >> carried out by the RIPE NCC. There is a New /24 IPv4 administration fee >> to ensure there is a financial consequence to joining the IPv4 Waiting >> List. The fee would be payable upon receipt of the /24, and members >> joining the waiting list who do not have an eligible LIR account, would >> pay the new LIR sign-up fee to open a new LIR account and join the >> waiting list. >> >> With this model, approximately 68% of members would pay less than the >> current annual fee, with the remaining 32% paying more. >> >> The discussion with members helped us to see that a category-based model >> would receive significant support from members if the version was >> simplified. Should members see the need to charge for other elements, >> then that can be incorporated into the category model in the coming >> years. Any such additional charges could potentially then reduce the >> fees per category. >> >> Model B - Price increase and ASN fee >> >> This model is the exact same as in the previous ten years, but there is >> a price increase of EUR 150 and a 50 EUR ASN fee to ensure we can meet >> our budgetary requirements while retaining the option for members to >> redistribute any excess contribution should we receive excess funds. >> >> Model C - Transfer fee and ASN fee >> >> This model is the exact same as in the previous ten years, but there is >> a charge of EUR 1,000 per transfer to be paid by the receiving party and >> a 50 EUR ASN fee to ensure we can meet our budgetary requirements while >> retaining the option for members to redistribute any excess contribution >> should we receive excess funds. >> >> Further information on the charging scheme models is provided at: >> https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/charging-scheme-2024-consultation/ >> >> The RIPE NCC Executive Board believes that a category-based model is the >> best option to help address uncertainty that might be caused by >> consolidation with multiple LIRs and to provide greater flexibility and >> fairness in how we charge members in the coming years. >> >> On 26 April, the final versions of the charging schemes that members >> will vote on will be published for the members to consider and discuss. >> If you have comments on the draft charging schemes, we therefore ask you >> to comment on the members-discuss mailing list by 19 April so we have >> time to incorporate any feedback if necessary. >> >> Importantly, we ask all members to register for the RIPE NCC General >> Meeting where the final decision will be in your hands. Register to >> participate and vote at: >> https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active >> >> Simon-Jan Haytink >> Chief Financial Officer >> RIPE NCC >> > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss at ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/andrejs.guba%40lvnet.lv >
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]