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/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[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 ]
Clement Cavadore
ccavadore at vedege.net
Tue Apr 18 16:37:43 CEST 2023
On Tue, 2023-04-18 at 16:30 +0200, Gert Doering wrote: > So a reclaim mechanism is required - the real question is, of course, > what that mechanism should be. Pay NCC staff to go out and ask LIRs > "is this ASN still in use? is the data accurate? can you return it?", > or create an incentive for them to come back voluntarily. Agree. But AFAIK, RIPE NCC already does this kind of mechanism for ASN which are not seen on the DFZ. They ask if it's in use, and why it's not seen on the DFZ (and there are legit use case, for example for IXP route- server ASN, or for out of internet routing domains). But changing the billing rules for non-scarce resources seems a bit too rough, IMHO. Best, -- Clément Cavadore
- 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 ]