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

We share this point.
All long-standing SMALL LIRs which used their allocations properly along 
20+ years would be penalized by model A, unless we agree to move the 
category boundary beyond /19+/22+/32, which used to be a standard SMALL 
category allocations for a decade or more.

And as we can see earlier in this thread, in ARIN this is still SMALL 
category:
https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/
Larger than /20, up to and including /18 + Larger than /32, up to and 
including /28 =  Small ($2000)

Regards,
Vitaly Zubok

On 04.05.2023 16:21, J Pawlus wrote:
> 
> 
>> What makes  the pay per category model  "A" as proposed impossible for me to vote for is it penalizes all long standing lirs.
>> When I started working  with Ripe you signed up completed the forms and a /19 was allocated, more if you could demonstrate need but /19 was default.
>> You then requested an AS.
>> Run out came along and you could get a last /22 together with your  v6 allocation.
>> So that adds up to a /19, /22, AS and /32(or /29)
>> That should be the bare minimum for small as  it is what any long standing lir has with Ripe, yet they would now find themselves in category 6 at the high end of the scale.
>> It does not mean they have more revenues than a lir started in say 2018 with much less IP  resources, just that they started first.
>> Note that I am not talking about the company I work for, we have more resources than those stated above, but I know several companies that fit into the category.
>>
>>
>> Brian
>>
> 
> +1. This is very good point.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Jerzy Pawlus
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/vit%40visti.net