This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[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 ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Tue Apr 18 14:35:48 CEST 2023
Hi, On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 05:05:09PM +0200, Maximilian Wilhelm wrote: > These models still introduce charges for ASNs, the questions on the "why?" > has been raised multiple times and I haven't seen any explanation for that. > Did I miss it? This might all be my fault :-) - so let me explain. We currently do not have a good reclaim mechanism for ASN, and I am absolutely convinced we do want one - while there is no shortage of ASNs, we have a responsibility on properly keeping track on "where are those?", and the effort for that grows with the number of ASNs handed out, especially if they become unused and nobody really knows anymore. So option 1, the NCC regularily comes asking ("does anyone in your company know if AS196631 is still in use?"). Option 2, you find a financial incentive to make people return ASNs that are no longer needed, because they find the yearly monetary transfer annoying. I am convinced that a charge around 50 EUR is a reasonable thing to add - it's low enough that it is not really noticeable for someone who really need a public ASN, as in "takes part of global BGP, has infrastructure, etc", while at the same time annoying enough so you want to get rid of it if you do no longer need the ASN. I've never done the math on "how does this influence the NCC budget?" - but assuming some 20.000 "RIPE" ASNs out there, and also assuming 50 EUR/year, this would be a million EUR/year, which otherwise would have to be part of the member fees. So, while this was explicitly never my intention ("lower our member fees by making other people pay for their ASN"), it does have an effect - ASN fees and PI fees can be billed "onwards" toward the customer, while the regular LIR fee is "mine to keep"... Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20230418/9b319b74/attachment-0001.sig>
- 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 ]