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

With all the focus on how to apportion costs, I hope we don't lose focus on
the total budget. As a small LIR, we are unable to take advantage of the
peripheral activities, credits, etc, we just want to register.
By analogy, we can't afford an all-inclusive package holiday, we just want
to hire a car!
Paul
F4RN

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024, 08:25 , <m.terzioglu at prebits.de> wrote:

> This is good point of view i think.
>
> Non-profit organisation but by doing this they are punishing people.
>
> As old as you were and as clever as you were, you take resources...
>
>
> --
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best Regards
>
> Murat TERZIOGLU
> PREBITS
>
> Bochumer Str. 20
> 44866 Bochum
> Deutschland
>
> Telefon: 0234/58825994
> Telefax: 0234/58825995
>
> www.prebits.de
> info at prebits.de
>
> USt-ID: DE315418902
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> Im Auftrag von
> ROSKOMNADZOR LIMITED
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 18:46
> An: members-discuss at ripe.net
> Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging
> Scheme 2025 Proposals
>
> RIPE saying about last IPv4 /8 is run out, but stop...
>
> IPv4 /8 - Mercedes-Benz Group AG
>
> https://apps.db.ripe.net/db-web-ui/query?bflag=false&dflag=false&rflag=true&searchtext=53.0.0.0&source=RIPE
> (over 50% of pool unused! Guess they even didnt have so much cars for so
> much IPs)
>
> IPv4 /8 - UK Ministry of Defence
>
> https://apps.db.ripe.net/db-web-ui/query?bflag=false&dflag=false&rflag=true&searchtext=25.0.0.0&source=RIPE
> (Never was announced -
> https://stat.ripe.net/ui2013/%2025.0.0.0#tabId=at-a-glance)
>
> This members hold most biggest blocks in RIPE and didnt use it, but pay
> same - 50 EUR/year for this IPv4 /8.
>
> When some LIRs have /8 and pay for that 50 EUR/year + 1600 EUR/year
> (membership fee), other members paying same amount for 1 x /24 (if they
> have luck!)
>
> Its nonsense, why RIPE continue to funding more and more budgets from
> small LIRs?
>
> Its looks not good. Its looks like a some lobby!
>
> On 11.04.2024 15:52, Dmitry Kohmanyuk via members-discuss wrote:
> > On 11 Apr 2024, at 16:55, Evgeniy Brodskiy via members-discuss <
> members-discuss at ripe.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Confidential/Конфіденційно
> >
> > Just a note: you are posting on mailing list which is archived so
> > everyone can read every post, yours too. Perhaps that line was added
> > automatically:)
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> > In the fairness of use of learning resources, RPKI, Training you are
> correct, yet we are talking about “cost of doing business” resources.
> Since you seem to represent a biggest mobile telecom of Ukraine, Kyivstar,
> and also the only IPv6-enabled large ISP in the country (thanks for that
> btw) - what is your opinion re charging per resource allocated, either by
> category method, or logarithmic method, or some other (number of resources
> in use, objects in the database, etc.). Your company makes heavy use of
> IPv4 and has millions of subscribers: what does “fair” sounds like to you?
> Do you support extra fees for those who have IPv4 available, or discount
> for those who have to make do with IPv6 only?
> >
> > (Deleting hundreds of quoted lines below.)
> >
> > — dk at hostmaster.ua “We had IPv6 before Kyivstar”
> >
> >> -----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 :
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > members-discuss mailing list
> > members-discuss at ripe.net
> > https://mailman.ripe.net/
> > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/admin%40roskomn
> > adzor.io
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/m.terzioglu%40prebits.de
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/paul.newton%40f4rn.org.uk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20240412/df02291b/attachment.html>