[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals

I will reiterate something i said already in another communication
channel:

Thats not about 400,50 or 40 EUR. 
It is about trends, and everybody can see, this year from small to big
business - everybody cutting budgets/expenses, including large
companies who didnt before - doing massive layoffs of core staff,
and they went very far this year.
Except RIPE, who goes totally opposite way.
While uncertainty and risk management, preparing for a prolonged
downturn, forecasts of LIR reduction, the current situation just
screams - reduce expenses.
And although numerous voices on the maillist are outraged by this, RIPE
diligently pretends, "This is fine" (KC Green's comic "On Fire."),
and keep proposing increased budget options like nothing happening.

On Thu, 2024-04-11 at 13:30 +0000, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via
members-discuss wrote:
> 
> 
> The proposed ASN fee is 0 on options A and B and 50 euro / year per
> ASN with option C.
> 50 euro / year is just over 4 euro / month.
> So about the price of a cup of coffee…
>  
> If that kills your business …
>  
>  
> --
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
> https://www.blacknight.com/
> https://blacknight.blog/
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
> Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.:
> 370845
>  
> I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not
> expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of
> Mihail Fedorov <mihail at fedorov.net>
> Date: Thursday, 11 April 2024 at 13:40
> To: 
> Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net <members-discuss at ripe.net>
> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC
> Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
> 
> [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from
> unrecognised sources.
> 
> Charging per ASN is even worse than just price increase. It is
> terrible and killing even more LIRs
> 
> Imagine rather new LIR who is trying to do business based on what is
> LIR intended for - providing LIR services to consumers. For example
> 30 clients who requested ASN sponsorship during year.
> If charged per ASN they will pay twice more than huge corporations
> serving only purpose of their own. Those typically have just 1-2 ASNs
> and tons of resources attached to it. They are main source of work
> for RIPE staff and they should be funding expensive projects like
> Atlas and others.
> 
> Actually working LIRs also have business contracts/logic already
> established on current charging scheme and adding ASN fee will kill
> them.
> 
> Once again - why not just bill based on resources? It’s extremely
> easy. Oh, right, resource holders won’t like it :)
> 
> > On 11 Apr 2024, at 15:11, ROSKOMNADZOR LIMITED
> <admin at roskomnadzor.io> wrote:
> >
> > Why LIR who havent resources must pay same amount as LIR who have a
> lot of resources?
> >
> > RIPE declaring about "community" and about "spending budget must be
> distributed across all members" - but in practically is not.
> >
> > When RIPE want to take extra fee for ASN - its mean then RIPE want
> to charge by resources. Then why RIPE dont want to charge due
> resources for IPv4?
> >
> > Guess big members who hold a lot IPv4 allocations dont want it -
> because current situation is fine for their point of view. Dont
> forget - RIPE charget 50 EUR per resource - not matter what is it -
> /24 or /16.
> >
> > If we are not using all RIPE services - why we must pay for that?
> Why not any option to select - "Only core services"?
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11.04.2024 11:45, Evgeniy Brodskiy wrote:
> >> Confidential/Конфіденційно
> >> Hi,
> >> Not at all.
> >> More RESOURCES in hands of some LIR doesn’t mean consuming MORE
> SERVICES.
> >> If you want to bill somebody based on consuming SERVICES it would
> be logical to count consuming SERVICES, not RESOURCES.
> >> But who cares about logic if goal to force somebody else to pay...
> even if some particular BIG LIR doesn't use majority of this
> SERVICES.
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> On Behalf
> Of ROSKOMNADZOR LIMITED
> >> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2024 2:06 PM
> >> To: members-discuss at ripe.net
> >> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC
> Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
> >> [Вы нечасто получаете письма от admin at roskomnadzor.io. Узнайте,
> почему это важно, по
> адресуhttps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> >> Its great, but why RIPE trying to make funding from less adquate
> method?
> >> Big members of RIPE region request MORE SERVICE - but why ALL must
> pay for that?
> >> Why RIPE continue to ignoring taking membership fee based on
> RESOURCES?
> >> Currently RIPE depend upon LIR signup fee and year/year LIR fee in
> most cases - but its very unstable.
> >> NOR, RIPE can take fee per IPv4/24 in holding per member and have
> STABLE SOURCE OF FUNDING!
> >> ARIN, APNIC, AFRINIC already a long time do it on successful
> basis.
> >> Why small members of RIPE must pay SAME amount as big members? Are
> its fair? Guess not.
> >> Dont forget about fact - if early LIR guarantee receive /22, after
> only
> >> /24 - then now LIR receive only place in waiting list (like in
> Communists USSR) and undefined ETA on receive resources! But pay SAME
> amount as any other.
> >> Why RIPE didnt want to change fee based on fact - if LIR didnt
> have IPv4 in holding - then LIR must pay less, nor LIR who holding
> 10-100-100 IPv4 blocks?
> >> On 11.04.2024 10:46, Daniel Stolpe via members-discuss wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Yoel is absolutely right. A few years ago the financial situation
> was
> >>> not looking good but the "last /8 policy" made a huge difference.
> The
> >>> "handing out /22 blocks" was like printing new money  - for a
> while.
> >>> As the number of members whent sky rocket, RIPE could lower
> membership
> >>> fees at the same time as an ever expanding budget.
> >>>
> >>> But now we are seeing what everyone could have predicted - the
> number
> >>> of members are declining and the NCC keeps calling for more
> money.
> >>>
> >>> No, this is not reasonable. In tough times everyone has to try to
> make
> >>> ends meet. The NCC should be no exception. For years only a few
> >>> persistent voices have been trying to call for cuts or cost
> control as
> >>> an alternative to eternal growth. What happened last year should
> have
> >>> been a clear signal but instead the voting is now rigged with
> more or
> >>> less equal outcomes.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Daniel Stolpe
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024, Yoel Caspersen via members-discuss wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dear RIPE member,
> >>>>
> >>>> Kaj Niemi is absolutely right: RIPE increasing its budget does
> not
> >>>> serve the interests of its members, and allowing it to pass
> because
> >>>> you are spending other people's money is a sign of bad judgement
> and
> >>>> lack of accountability.
> >>>>
> >>>> For years, I was wondering why RIPE was handing out /22 blocks
> at
> >>>> what was effectively a fraction of the market price. I think we
> have
> >>>> the answer now: Membership fees and diluted voting power of each
> >>>> member served the interests of the management just fine.
> >>>>
> >>>> RIPE is a mandatory phonebook for IP addresses, nothing more and
> >>>> nothing less. All the fat that has grown on the organisation in
> the
> >>>> last decade must be trimmed, and I call for a drastic budget
> >>>> reduction - if some members are willing to spend their own money
> on
> >>>> additional services, they should be free to do so, but with
> absolute
> >>>> emphasis on this part: their own money.
> >>>>
> >>>> From a fairness perspective, RIPE should be granted the
> necessary
> >>>> funds to run the database service, meaning:
> >>>>
> >>>> - A base fee to keep the database service running, shared
> equally by
> >>>> all members
> >>>> - Fees on actions that require manual work from the RIPE NCC
> (e.g.
> >>>> transfers, mergers etc)
> >>>>
> >>>> Forget about levying higher taxes on larger members - RIPE is
> not a
> >>>> tax collector and doesn't exist to offset differences in wealth.
> It
> >>>> exists to deliver a necessary service, and each member should
> pay
> >>>> according to the burden they place on the organisation.
> >>>>
> >>>> How much should we pay for a database service? In the ideal
> world,
> >>>> there should be no monopoly on the service and we could let the
> >>>> market forces decide what the right price is.
> >>>>
> >>>> I realize that might not be feasible right now, so we are stuck
> with
> >>>> the next best solution: Letting the community figure out what
> the
> >>>> acceptable price is - I guess most RIPE members run some sort of
> >>>> database service of their own and therefore possess a profound
> >>>> understanding of the associated costs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Until we have better data, I suggest we look at the past for
> >>>> inspiration: Use the budget for 2014 (€ 22 millions) and adjust
> for
> >>>> inflation - that amounts to approximately € 28 millions.
> >>>>
> >>>> To get there we can slash External Engagement & Community (€ 9,4
> >>>> millions in the 2024 budget) - RIPE is a monopoly, and the
> members
> >>>> will be there regardless of the activities in that area.
> >>>>
> >>>> I also suggest that we take a look at the expenses associated
> with
> >>>> the Office of the Managing Director (€ 2,2 millions in the 2024
> >>>> budget) - after all, RIPE is an organisation with less than 200
> >>>> employees.
> >>>>
> >>>> I call for members of the community to contribute: What is the
> right
> >>>> amount of staffing in the RIPE NCC?
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Yoel Caspersen
> >>>> CTO
> >>>> Kviknet.dk ApS
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 3:12 PM Kaj Niemi <kajtzu at basen.net>
> wrote:
> >>>>       Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Very politely put I do not think any of the three proposed
> charging
> >>>> schemes are in the membership's interest - they certainly aren't
> in mine.
> >>>>
> >>>> All three seem to be designed to assure that NCC can continue
> along,
> >>>> business as usual, with its tasks. Thus, we could pretend that
> there
> >>>> isn't a big issue with the membership numbers declining. We
> could
> >>>> also pretend there isn't a real problem with the value
> proposition of
> >>>> the services. Furthermore, we could also pretend that we do not
> care
> >>>> that it all is conveniently funded by the membership. I mean,
> what is
> >>>> 1500 or
> >>>> 1900 euro to most people? I have heard the last several times in
> the
> >>>> past. After all, why should we care about the expenditure when
> the
> >>>> sums are so small for each LIR? Why should we care when it is
> not our
> >>>> own money? I'll tell you. Not caring about the transaction size
> is
> >>>> bad, if you are willing to let these kinds of sums slide, you'll
> let
> >>>> it slide on bigger amounts. As is treating other people's money
> (OPM)
> >>>> differently than if it were your own. These eventually lead to
> lack
> >>>> of accountability.
> >>>>
> >>>> What is being proposed is really a significant increase in
> membership
> >>>> fees. In particular, significantly above what it used to cost on
> >>>> average to produce services for each member (whether they use
> them or
> >>>> not). Note when I say what it used to cost, as in FY2024 the
> cost per
> >>>> LIR will be higher.
> >>>>
> >>>> Now, with the membership in further decline the average cost per
> >>>> member will once more be higher in FY2025. Next year, I forecast
> that
> >>>> we will have the same "discussion" for
> >>>> FY2026 as NCC comes around and asks for more money. Once again.
> Why?
> >>>> Because according to projections the amount of members will
> continue
> >>>> to decrease resulting in higher fees per organization. Once
> again.
> >>>> All in the advantageous name of the articles of association that
> >>>> allow pretty much anything.
> >>>>
> >>>> Following the above rational thought with another is, that what
> one
> >>>> should be doing is choosing what to either invoice separately or
> drop
> >>>> completely. Yes, really. Everyone is happy with free services,
> it is
> >>>> when you apply the money test - request someone to pay for
> something
> >>>> - when you see if what you create contains value.
> >>>>
> >>>> Considering NCC managed to "save" 5% in the FY2024 budget
> compared to
> >>>> FY2023, asking for 8.1% increase (4% annualized) the next year
> is,
> >>>> well, kind of cheeky. It restores the budget pretty much to what
> it
> >>>> would have been with two annual increases. As an exercise in
> >>>> budgetary engineering I do approve. As a paying member I do not.
> >>>>
> >>>> What really would be needed is competition. Competition would
> make
> >>>> the RIR market more efficient. It is rather obvious that the RIR
> >>>> markets aren't anywhere near the efficiency they could be at.
> >>>> Competition would mean that people wanting to pay
> >>>> 1900 - or even more in the future - could choose to do so and
> those
> >>>> who don't want could potentially pay less. Reduced to the very
> basics
> >>>> one is paying for bits in a database.
> >>>> In that sense this is rather similar to the certificate market
> where
> >>>> at one time the cost per certificate was sky high and there were
> only
> >>>> a few issuers. Today, I am guessing most do not pay thousands
> >>>> annually for a few bits in theirs. Neither do most people care
> >>>> whether the cert was issued by Verisign, Gandi or someone else.
> >>>> Having looked into it out of curiosity, real competition does
> not
> >>>> seem to be possible as the principles in
> >>>> ICP-2 pretty much state that there can/should only be one RIR
> per
> >>>> region. Which makes NCC the definition of a monopoly. Monopolies
> with
> >>>> nice and polite people, well intended purpose and mission creep
> are
> >>>> not good, they're bad. For everyone.
> >>>>
> >>>> Finally, the surplus. The concept itself is interesting and I do
> know
> >>>> where it comes from. But from an financial point of view it is
> really
> >>>> lending money to someone else and then (maybe) getting it back,
> a
> >>>> year later, less inflation if they did not spend it.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I would kindly request that the EB would add option D or "Option
> D:
> >>>> No Changes from 2023". :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Kaj
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Kaj
> >>>>
> >>>>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> >>>>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> >>>> ___________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>> From: ncc-announce <ncc-announce-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of
> >>>> Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh at ripe.net>
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2024 12:18
> >>>> To: ncc-announce at ripe.net <ncc-announce at ripe.net>
> >>>> Subject: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025
> >>>> Proposals You don't often get email from simonjh at ripe.net. Learn
> why
> >>>> this is important
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear RIPE NCC members,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> We can now share three draft charging scheme models for 2025
> that the
> >>>> Executive Board approved with the following resolution at its
> meeting
> >>>> on 25 March 2024:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The RIPE NCC Executive Board approves the submission of the RIPE
> NCC
> >>>> Charging Scheme 2025 options to the upcoming RIPE NCC General
> Meeting
> >>>> for members to vote on.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> - Option A  -  Charging Scheme as is with 22.58% price increase
> for
> >>>> the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,900) and a 0%
> price
> >>>> increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments*
> (EUR
> >>>> 50)
> >>>>
> >>>> - Option B  -  Charging Scheme as is with 20.97% price increase
> for
> >>>> the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,875) and a 50%
> price
> >>>> increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments*
> (EUR
> >>>> 75)
> >>>>
> >>>> - Option C  -  Charging Scheme as is with 16.13% price increase
> for
> >>>> the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,800), a 50% price
> >>>> increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments*
> (EUR
> >>>> 75) and a new AS Numbers fee of EUR 50 per assignment
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> *Resources falling under this charge are IPv4 and IPv6 PI
> >>>> assignments; Anycast assignments; IPv4 and IPv6 IXP assignments;
> and
> >>>> Legacy IPv4 resource registrations through a sponsoring LIR.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The full draft charging scheme models are available from the GM
> >>>> Documentation page:
> >>>> https://www/
> >>>> .ripe.net%2Fmembership%2Fmeetings%2Fgm%2Fmeetings%2Fmay-
> 2024%2Fdocume
> >>>> ntation-and-archives%2Fsupporting-
> documents%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy
> >>>>
> .Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd5
> >>>>
> 73bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004040536%7CUnknown%7CTW
> >>>>
> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI
> >>>>
> 6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3tUyMKDzZZY69M3vjjDqaKxgBrrQMeI1rnhBImzaex
> >>>> Q%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Although the proposed models are relatively simple, we provide a
> >>>> calculator where you can see exactly what you would pay under
> each of
> >>>> the proposed models:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www/
> >>>>
> .ripe.net%2Fdocuments%2F3757%2FCS2025_Member_Calculator.xlsx&data=05%
> >>>>
> 7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18
> >>>>
> 264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004051566%
> >>>>
> 7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6I
> >>>>
> k1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=glTH6W6VCl6MSXrBbsUC8A4K%2FK
> >>>> TE8%2FavtiBwmmokOEY%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The main considerations for the Executive Board in proposing
> these
> >>>> three models are:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. The consolidation of LIR accounts, which means the burden to
> >>>> generate sufficient income must be met by fewer accounts
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. Increased costs due to inflation that were previously catered
> for
> >>>> by the large number of LIR accounts
> >>>>
> >>>> 3. Following the discussions last year and again this year,
> there
> >>>> appears to be no clear consensus among members on how a
> >>>> category-based model would work and the Board does not wish to
> put
> >>>> another category model forward at the upcoming GM that will be
> >>>> rejected by the members. Rather, the Board will propose a simple
> >>>> model that guarantees adequate funding for 2025 and 2026 - under
> this
> >>>> proposal, we expect there would be no need for a fee increase
> for
> >>>> 2026. The Board will work with the RIPE NCC on a more in-depth
> >>>> consultation with the members aimed at arriving at a sustainable
> >>>> solution for 2027 and beyond, possibly involving a new charging
> >>>> scheme task force.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> All three proposed models are designed to arrive at the same
> income
> >>>> of EUR 41.1 million for the RIPE NCC in 2025. This will cover
> all
> >>>> current services and activities, a 5% staff cost increase, a 2%
> >>>> inflation increase on all non-staff costs, and EUR 1 million for
> >>>> additional work relating to registry complexity and security
> projects
> >>>> aimed at ensuring the resilience of the Registry and the RIPE
> NCC
> >>>> more broadly.
> >>>> Any such additional work would be discussed with the membership
> >>>> during Activity Plan and Budget consultations and then need to
> be
> >>>> approved by the Board. This will also allow some leeway should
> more
> >>>> LIR accounts close than we expect.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It’s important to note that the RIPE NCC aims for an income
> budget
> >>>> that will provide a surplus, and this means that should we meet
> our
> >>>> budgetary targets, a surplus can be returned to members in 2026
> >>>> should they so wish.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> While the RIPE NCC continues to carry out cost-cutting efforts
> across
> >>>> the organisation, drastically reducing the budget at this time
> is not
> >>>> advisable due to the work that needs to be carried out,
> especially in
> >>>> relation to maintaining high-quality registry services and
> securing
> >>>> the registry and RIPE NCC systems. Cutting services or
> activities is
> >>>> not something the Board is planning to do, and such actions
> would
> >>>> take time and need full consultation with the membership. An
> overview
> >>>> of the activities and services that the membership fee covers is
> >>>> provided below this email.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I also urge you to see the presentation we delivered at the
> charging
> >>>> scheme open house in March so that the full context of the
> situation
> >>>> and the financial landscape we face is clear to you. The slides
> are
> >>>> available at:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www/
> >>>> .ripe.net%2Fmembership%2Fmeetings%2Fopen-house%2Fripe-ncc-
> charging-sc
> >>>> heme-
> 2025%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d1
> >>>>
> 7e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%
> >>>>
> 7C638484307004057320%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQ
> >>>>
> IjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5GTeIyn
> >>>> nzxx1WLZ%2BDRoFNWAhaRPvTemPafvKwlIaEEk%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Finally, I want to thank all those who have contributed to the
> >>>> consultation so far on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025. The
> models
> >>>> we present here are draft and in two weeks we will announce the
> final
> >>>> proposal that members will vote on at the GM on 22-24 May.
> Please
> >>>> discuss the draft proposal on the members-discuss at ripe.net list
> - any
> >>>> input received by 19 April can be incorporated if possible into
> the
> >>>> final models we propose. And make sure to register for the GM so
> that
> >>>> you can vote on the charging scheme that will apply for you and
> all
> >>>> members next year:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://my/.
> >>>>
> ripe.net%2F%23%2Fmeetings%2Factive&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40
> >>>>
> kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6e
> >>>>
> c3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004063238%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8ey
> >>>>
> JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%
> >>>>
> 7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BkYHbjPqA8CwacCNlVg0M%2FVvao%2FK8z1zB8hrEeaLXVg%3D&r
> >>>> eserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Simon-Jan Haytink
> >>>>
> >>>> Chief Financial Officer
> >>>>
> >>>> RIPE NCC
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Services and Activities Covered by the Member Fee
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> - A trusted, efficient, accurate and resilient registry that
> >>>> guarantees uniqueness of resources held by members
> >>>>
> >>>> - Neutral information services uninfluenced by commercial or
> >>>> government interests that allow both the RIPE NCC and the
> community
> >>>> to carry out useful research into the Internet
> >>>>
> >>>> - Engagement activities, including RIPE and regional meetings,
> that
> >>>> build an active membership and community and that contribute to
> the
> >>>> overall good of the Internet
> >>>>
> >>>> - A voice and influence for the membership in key decision-
> making
> >>>> fora, including with governments and regulators
> >>>>
> >>>> - Protection of the Joint Internet Number Registry as developed
> by
> >>>> the Internet community
> >>>>
> >>>> - Learning and development activities that help to address
> skills
> >>>> shortages and contribute to an educated membership
> >>>>
> >>>> - Support for the Policy Development Process (PDP)
> >>>>
> >>>> - An authoritative registry of routing information provided by
> RPKI
> >>>> and the RIPE Database
> >>>>
> >>>> - K-root and DNS services
> >>>>
> >>>> - A dedicated staff with considerable expertise contributing to
> all
> >>>> of the above
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> members-discuss mailing list
> >>>> members-discuss at ripe.net
> >>>> https://lis/
> >>>> ts.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-
> discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvg
> >>>>
> eniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f
> >>>>
> 9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004071908%7CUnknown%
> >>>>
> 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJ
> >>>>
> XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=TSE6bLTaGjEzZzbwPbLL8ZivguLE4ZUOG1YC6W
> >>>> k3HVE%3D&reserved=0
> >>>> Unsubscribe:
> >>>> https://lis/
> >>>> ts.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-
> discuss%2Fyoel%2540kviknet.
> >>>>
> dk&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d
> >>>>
> 88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C63848430
> >>>>
> 7004081513%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMz
> >>>>
> IiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=h8qgUsC1phTJj9r9T
> >>>> HsO2THM2UZcg6CMMNwff4PP3SA%3D&reserved=0
> >>>
> >>>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> _
> >>> ___________
> >>>
> >>> Daniel Stolpe           Tel:  08 - 688 11 81
> >>> stolpe at resilans.se
> >>> Resilans AB             Fax:  08 - 55 00 21 63
> >>> http://www.resilans.se/
> >>> Box 45 094                                  556741-1193
> >>> 104 30 Stockholm
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> members-discuss mailing list
> >>> members-discuss at ripe.net
> >>> https://list/
> >>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-
> discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvgen
> >>>
> iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9b
> d
> >>>
> 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004100103%7CUnknown%7CT
> W
> >>>
> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI
> 6
> >>>
> Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y5j98PfqxzkN%2B2UYI6E5kDMJLYj1qlHRc64sClcZF
> a
> >>> U%3D&reserved=0
> >>> Unsubscribe:
> >>> https://list/
> >>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fregistry-
> ripe%2540r
> >>>
> esilans.se&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e
> 9
> >>>
> f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6
> 3
> >>>
> 8484307004109226%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoi
> V
> >>>
> 2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2FLi%2BQEHd
> R
> >>> thZtiNdR7ETMPAkPAzVevDnMjvq75F3kf8%3D&reserved=0
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> members-discuss mailing list
> >>> members-discuss at ripe.net
> >>> https://list/
> >>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-
> discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvgen
> >>>
> iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9b
> d
> >>>
> 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004115782%7CUnknown%7CT
> W
> >>>
> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI
> 6
> >>>
> Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vY2oba0wvj08c6W4f%2FFaPi6BRvFFLM7AbIf5i84qT
> 6
> >>> s%3D&reserved=0
> >>> Unsubscribe:
> >>> https://list/
> >>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-
> discuss%2Fadmin%2540roskomnad
> >>>
> zor.io&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54
> 2
> >>>
> 32d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C63848
> 4
> >>>
> 307004121940%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2lu
> M
> >>>
> zIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=NlQ4MnUaG53yS1eK
> O
> >>> %2F2nhgAkG8yzbN7B3c4koumTvKw%3D&reserved=0
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> members-discuss mailing list
> >> members-discuss at ripe.net
> >> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> >> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/evgeniy.brodskiy%40kyivstar.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > members-discuss mailing list
> > members-discuss at ripe.net
> > https://mailman.ripe.net/
> > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/mihail%40fedorov.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/michele%40blacknight.com
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/nuclearcat%40nuclearcat.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20240411/9eb3acbe/attachment-0001.html>