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

> If you think about different "non-MAIN" services like Learning, then there is no difference between big and small LIR at all.

This is simply not true. If you think of a larger LIR (typically, but not always) with more employees, the bigger lir will typically (Again not always) have more of its Employees attend real life training events for example.

Whereas smaller LIR's may be bound by tighter budgets and will potentially focus on online-sessions.

The same is also true for community building with real life events.

This is also why i would favor that the RipeNCC focuses on online events and online training (with recorded corses and just online Q&A sessions) over "tought" courses (with the same content repeating) for real life/online sessions.



> Even if you think about auditing or maintaining RIPE DB, it would be strange to think that working with /16 requires 256 times more time and effort than working with /24.

While i would not say 256 times more, i would say more on average. Because whats the chance both will be a single assignment of the whole resources to an end user/org? And if the resource is split into smaller inetnums then yes it will be more time to audit,...


> And again you are talking about fairness.


Especially when considering the argument above, if we want a contribution that is more fair than the current model to most of the LIR's, then the number of assignments (per /48, or /24) is a good general indicator of scale.


Regards






On 4/11/24 3:53 PM, Evgeniy Brodskiy via members-discuss wrote:
> Confidential/Конфіденційно
>
> Why do you think this statement is correct: “They are the main source of work for RIPE employees.” ??
>
> Even if you think about auditing or maintaining RIPE DB, it would be strange to think that working with /16 requires 256 times more time and effort than working with /24.
> If you think about different "non-MAIN" services like Learning, then there is no difference between big and small LIR at all.
> Resources do not reflect all of these dependencies. And again you are talking about fairness.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mihail Fedorov
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2024 3:39 PM
> Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
>
> 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 адресу https://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%2Fdocu
>>>>> me
>>>>> ntation-and-archives%2Fsupporting-documents%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgen
>>>>> iy
>>>>> .Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9b
>>>>> d5
>>>>> 73bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004040536%7CUnknown%7C
>>>>> TW
>>>>> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXV
>>>>> CI
>>>>> 6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3tUyMKDzZZY69M3vjjDqaKxgBrrQMeI1rnhBImza
>>>>> ex
>>>>> 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=0
>>>>> 5%
>>>>> 7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a
>>>>> 18
>>>>> 264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C63848430700405156
>>>>> 6%
>>>>> 7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
>>>>> 6I
>>>>> k1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=glTH6W6VCl6MSXrBbsUC8A4K%2
>>>>> FK
>>>>> 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%7C3dec1
>>>>> d1
>>>>> 7e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C
>>>>> 0%
>>>>> 7C638484307004057320%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLC
>>>>> JQ
>>>>> IjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5GTeI
>>>>> yn
>>>>> 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%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a
>>>>> 6e
>>>>> c3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004063238%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8
>>>>> ey
>>>>> JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C
>>>>> 0%
>>>>> 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%7CE
>>>>> vg
>>>>> eniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf
>>>>> 8f
>>>>> 9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004071908%7CUnknow
>>>>> n%
>>>>> 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiL
>>>>> CJ
>>>>> XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=TSE6bLTaGjEzZzbwPbLL8ZivguLE4ZUOG1YC
>>>>> 6W
>>>>> k3HVE%3D&reserved=0
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>> https://lis/
>>>>> ts.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fyoel%2540kviknet.
>>>>> dk&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f5423
>>>>> 2d
>>>>> 88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484
>>>>> 30
>>>>> 7004081513%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2lu
>>>>> Mz
>>>>> IiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=h8qgUsC1phTJj9r
>>>>> 9T
>>>>> 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%7CEvg
>>>> en
>>>> iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9
>>>> bd
>>>> 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004100103%7CUnknown%7C
>>>> TW
>>>> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVC
>>>> I6
>>>> Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y5j98PfqxzkN%2B2UYI6E5kDMJLYj1qlHRc64sClcZ
>>>> Fa
>>>> U%3D&reserved=0
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> https://list/
>>>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fregistry-ripe%254
>>>> 0r
>>>> esilans.se&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17
>>>> e9
>>>> f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C
>>>> 63
>>>> 8484307004109226%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjo
>>>> iV
>>>> 2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2FLi%2BQEH
>>>> dR
>>>> 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%7CEvg
>>>> en
>>>> iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f54232d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9
>>>> bd
>>>> 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484307004115782%7CUnknown%7C
>>>> TW
>>>> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVC
>>>> I6
>>>> Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vY2oba0wvj08c6W4f%2FFaPi6BRvFFLM7AbIf5i84q
>>>> T6
>>>> s%3D&reserved=0
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> https://list/
>>>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fadmin%2540roskomn
>>>> ad
>>>> zor.io&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C3dec1d17e9f5
>>>> 42
>>>> 32d88c08dc5a18264a%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6384
>>>> 84
>>>> 307004121940%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2l
>>>> uM
>>>> zIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=NlQ4MnUaG53yS1e
>>>> KO
>>>> %2F2nhgAkG8yzbN7B3c4koumTvKw%3D&reserved=0
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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%7C036de29fd4c449fcd1b208dc5a247e27%7Cf8f
>>> 9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484360917598516%7CUnknown%
>>> 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJ
>>> XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=h8OUQ%2BQLt8n53JXrMFkAiZuFP3cavME5
>>> kM9qBisBW%2BQ%3D&reserved=0
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://lis/
>>> ts.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fevgeniy.brodskiy%
>>> 2540kyivstar.net&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C036
>>> de29fd4c449fcd1b208dc5a247e27%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%
>>> 7C0%7C638484360917604995%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAi
>>> LCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata
>>> =iEicBVrkwWvrsraRO8YcAbgVPRjrwBbKOgs83cbmD4g%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%7C036de29fd4c449fcd1b208dc5a247e27%7Cf8f9bd
>> 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484360917611662%7CUnknown%7CTW
>> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
>> Mn0%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kK98VCUHMtAXysvAhUKfUQ01r9rVB9c7GqCLDF86
>> 7p0%3D&reserved=0
>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://list/
>> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fmihail%2540fedorov.
>> net&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C036de29fd4c449fcd
>> 1b208dc5a247e27%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638484360
>> 917617941%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIi
>> LCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=mSWgo9qeSONeXCJp
>> c%2B9FYeqeMXclGVYzC9oTd5F%2BBb8%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/ripe-members%40sebastian-graf.at