[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 ]
Lennart Seitz
mail at lseitz.de
Tue Apr 18 22:18:43 CEST 2023
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://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > 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://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > 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://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > > 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://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20230418/e810de0b/attachment-0001.html>
- 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 ]