[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024

On 3/8/23 15:14, Sander Steffann wrote:

Hi folks,

>> Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
> 
> I feel this model double-charges for PI and ASN. LIRs with many of those resources both pay €50 per resource, and also run the risk of being pushed up into a higher category. I strongly feel that PI and ASN should be excluded from the category score calculation.

Absolutely!

I'm also wondering why out of the sudden there should be a fee for ASNs 
- to the best of my knowledge they aren't as scarce resources, not even 
the 16bit ASNs.

So I strongly object to introducing charges for ASNs here and also 
strongly object to having sponsored resources count into the number of 
resources used to decide which category an LIR falls into (IF this was 
considered a good way forward)

> On a side note, I also feel that the RIPE NCC’s budget is getting a bit out of control. RIPE NCC is primarily an Internet Registry, and I would like to see focus concentrating on Registration Services, and less on anything else. I understand that the RIPE NCC is in a useful position to do nice research projects, represent the internet community etc. But looking at the budget it looks like the rest of the organisation is growing much faster than the registry function. I therefore also object to the €450 price increase in model 1.

I fully agree with Sander here. Did I miss any efforts to reduce 
spending and reaching out to the membership with ideas to reduce costs 
in the light of the LIR count to fall down? If I did not I'd really like 
to see something along those lines.

Thanks for providing the spreadsheet to visualize how things would look 
like - that made it easier to understand.

As of today I have to say "No" to both proposals though, as I don't see 
how just increasing costs and thereby impacting smaller LIRs (who might 
sponsor a number of resources) can be a way forward.

Thanks,
Max