<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> </head> <body dir="auto"> <div>If you give the LIR's with more /24's, or whatever the measure, more votes then it will not be a fair community/decision scheme on policies anymore since then all the largest LIR's will decide the decisions etc in RIPE and will make everything in favor of only them.</div> <div id="AppleMailSignature"> </div> <div id="AppleMailSignature">The costs for larger LIR's will be higher if you would charge per IPv4, though a large LIR that needs them and uses them should not complaint since large LIR's assumably have larger incomes and if not then something is in my opinion wrong with the financial part or business scheme of that LIR.</div> <div id="AppleMailSignature"> </div> <div id="AppleMailSignature">On the other hand large LIR's that don't use them will get an extra reason to get rid of the extra IPv4 adresses which he does not use since it will cost extra money.</div> <div id="AppleMailSignature"> </div> <div id="AppleMailSignature">I would vote in favor for a solution where transfers of IPv4 adresses would only occur through RIPE. (Selling and buying to/from RIPE only)</div> <div id="AppleMailSignature"> </div> <div id="AppleMailSignature">Aswell i would vote in favor for a solution to charge for IPv4 adresses of a LIR.</div> <div id="AppleMailSignature"> </div> <div id="AppleMailSignature">My guess is that this combo will be the solution to the current issues.</div> <div id="AppleMailSignature"> Met vriendelijke groet,<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Stefan van Westering<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> SoftTech Automatisering B.V.<o:p></o:p> <a dir="ltr" href="x-apple-data-detectors://3/1" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="address" x-apple-data-detectors-result="3/1">Engelandlaan 312</a><o:p></o:p> <a dir="ltr" href="x-apple-data-detectors://3/1" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="address" x-apple-data-detectors-result="3/1">2711 DZ Zoetermeer</a> Telefoon Support: <a dir="ltr" href="tel:079%20-%20303%2001%2017" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="telephone" x-apple-data-detectors-result="4">079 - 303 01 17</a><o:p></o:p> Telefoon Algemeen: <a dir="ltr" href="tel:079%20-%20593%2075%2016" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="telephone" x-apple-data-detectors-result="5/0">079 - 593 75 16</a><o:p></o:p> Fax: <a dir="ltr" href="tel:079%20-%20331%2093%2063" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="telephone" x-apple-data-detectors-result="5/1">079 - 331 93 63</a><o:p></o:p> Email: <a href="mailto:jeroen@softtech.nl">stefan@softtech.nl</a><o:p></o:p> Internet: <a href="http://www.softtech.nl/">http://www.softtech.nl</a> | Email Support:<a href="mailto:sbsupport@softtech.nl">sbsupport@softtech.nl</a> </div> <div> Op 24 jul. 2016 om 11:28 heeft Brandon Butterworth <<a href="mailto:hostmaster@bogons.net">hostmaster@bogons.net</a>> het volgende geschreven: </div> <blockquote type="cite"> <div>On Sun Jul 24, 2016 at 10:18:19AM +0200, Prager-IT e.U. wrote: <blockquote type="cite"> <blockquote type="cite">With membership fee based on number of /24 then members may decide </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite"> <blockquote type="cite">to also get one vote per /24. Would they vote for this scheme (do </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite"> <blockquote type="cite">they get their N*/24 votes before or after this vote...) </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite">I don't understand what you are trying to say </blockquote> I'm saying that if fees are proportional to resource then the members with more resource (/24's or whatever the measure) may wish to have a quantity of votes proportional to the resource they pay for <blockquote type="cite">each entity has one vote </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite">even if they have multiple LIR accounts under the same entity. </blockquote> In the current scheme, if you change the scheme that may change too <blockquote type="cite">We are not shifting any costs, we are just asking each member to pay their </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite">fair share for the amount of resources they are using </blockquote> Yes it is, it is shifting the cost to larger members, hugely <blockquote type="cite">8,23 Euros per year per 256 IPv4 addresses is hardly a business case </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite">breaking amount of money. </blockquote> I referred to the current scheme which is also hardly a business case breaking amount of money. So cost is not a good reason to change it especially when changing it will drive the sort of behaviour that RIPE are trying to prevent <blockquote type="cite">These changes will also bring a very real cost to </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite">super large LIRs that hold a ton of resources and may </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite">finally spark some meaningful IPv6 adoption. </blockquote> It may but the access networks with large amounts of IPv4 are adopting IPv6 already, it takes a long time and it's only been started in the last few years but it's happening in large chunks, like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoqGvZr4Uto">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoqGvZr4Uto</a> The hard bit is content hosters who mostly have enough space and don't have enough IPv4 that charging more for it will be a large incentive brandon ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: <a href="https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/">https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/</a> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. </div> </blockquote> </body> </html>