[members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available

Hi Hank!

No one is assuming any disrespect to IUCC and it’s part in building internet here. But I just bothered checking (sorry, did it just for an example) - IUCC owns two /16’s, one /18 and lots of /20-/22s. Can you check for us how many of them are actually assigned to some interfaces?

Typically it will be below 10%. If I’m right - that means that IUCC alone stops at least 576 small non-profit or startup networks from being legitimate part of routing table.

If I’m wrong - please forgive me and just give me /24 to subrent :-)

And yes, I assume that any company who administer 65000 interfaces (65000 computers or routers) should feel affordable paying ~6500 - ~65000 USD - effectively solving all possible RIPE financing problems. Except very rare cases of large non-profit networks.

P.S.: Each and every small network I see on IX has already appreciated and implemented IPv6 support. But realistically they still need some v4. And only large v4 space holders sometimes do not bother implementing IPv6 at all.

> On 1 Apr 2024, at 11:49, Hank Nussbacher <hank at interall.co.il> wrote:
> 
> On 29/03/2024 14:49, Gert Doering wrote:
> 
> IUCC was the first paying member to RIPE NCC in 1995 (since we realized the importance of supporting such a fledgling organization) and we have paid for our resources for the past 29 years.
> 
> See attached (page 3 of 4 pages - if anyone wants to see the full 4 page document - drop me an email off-list).
> 
> Regards,
> Hank
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote:
>>>> My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional resources a
>>>> company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time of joining Ripe.
>>> 
>>> ... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in
>>> 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards.  Back
>>> then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP...
>>> 
>>> So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a
>>> yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've
>>> been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already).
>>> 
>>> Gert Doering
>>>          -- NetMaster
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/hank%40interall.co.il
> 
> <ripe.jpg>_______________________________________________
> 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/mihail%40fedorov.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20240401/5b3182a2/attachment.html>