[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024

Hi Michael,

that would be my way of interpreting
> having model A based on the number of resources used, instead of fixed
> categories

But this could be easily avoided by creating fake records, therefore my
assumptions of them rising in case this would be deployed.

Regards,
Lennart

On 18.04.2023 22:08, cowmedia.de wrote:
>
> Hi Lennart,
>
>  
>
> not sure why do you think someone create fake records? The numbers for
> the calculation are independent from the records in the IP databases,
> but taken from the internal RIPE Database and not only used or unused
> ressources are billed, but ALL.
>
>  
>
> Michael
>
>  
>
> *Von:*members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> *Im Auftrag
> von *Lennart Seitz via members-discuss
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 17. April 2023 18:47
> *An:* members-discuss at ripe.net
> *Betreff:* Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Publication of
> Draft Charging Scheme Models 2024
>
>  
>
> Although i find this idea interesting, this would IMHO just lead to
> fake inetnum records in the DB to avoid the costs.
>
> Regards,
> Lennart
>
> On 14.04.2023 17:27, Paul Lewis wrote:
>
>     I'd like to also say that I think the idea of having model A based
>     on the number of resources used, instead of fixed categories,
>     would be better. It would help encourage unused resources to be
>     transferred or returned.
>
>     ---
>
>     Regards,
>     Paul Lewis.
>
>      
>
>     On 2023-04-13 19:02, cowmedia.de wrote:
>
>         Hi Simon,
>
>         by reading this email and checking the calculator again I have
>         the feeling
>         that the "listening to the members" as you say was not
>         happening. A majority
>         of the members want a usage based charging scheme (as per the
>         discussions on
>         this mailing list) and this is completely not reflected. Just
>         adding some
>         more categories with the highest still only arround 10K is not
>         sufficient.
>
>         Also what I do not understand is that my personal account with
>         more or less
>         one of the lowest resources you can get is already in Category
>         2?!?
>
>         I can just repeat what I have already done:
>
>         It should be billed by real resources used and directly
>         calculated not
>         within categories
>         Smaller LIRs should pay less and bigger LIRs should pay more
>         It is important that there is an incentive to get rid of
>         unused resources
>         and bring them back, this is only possible when you pay for
>         every resource
>         separate, otherwise no-one will take care.
>
>         I think this 3 models are not ready for vote and need to be
>         revised.
>         Also Model 3 I completely do not understand. Why should
>         someone pay for
>         transfers? This just means changes are going on and something
>         happens. Why
>         these companies should then pay more? The "bad" companies are
>         the ones that
>         do not implement IPv6 and their development just stall so
>         nothing happens.
>
>         Michael
>
>
>             On Apr 12, 2023, at 09:45, Simon-Jan Haytink
>             <simonjh at ripe.net <mailto:simonjh at ripe.net>> wrote:
>
>             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/cha
>         rging-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/cha
>         rging-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 <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
>         https://mailman.ripe.net/
>         Unsubscribe:
>         https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/info%40cowmedia.de
>
>          
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         members-discuss mailing list
>         members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
>         https://mailman.ripe.net/
>         Unsubscribe:
>         https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/paul.lewis%40fr89.uk
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     members-discuss mailing list
>
>     members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
>
>     https://mailman.ripe.net/
>
>     Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/mail%40lseitz.de
>
>  
>
> -- 
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> Lennart Seitz
> PGP-Schlüssel: 0x187abd76a5660379 (https://pgp.lseitz.de/key.asc)
> --


-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Lennart Seitz
PGP-Schlüssel: 0x187abd76a5660379 (https://pgp.lseitz.de/key.asc)
--

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20230418/e810de0b/attachment-0001.html>