<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Although i find this idea interesting,
this would IMHO just lead to fake inetnum records in the DB to
avoid the costs.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Lennart<br>
<br>
On 14.04.2023 17:27, Paul Lewis wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:964bb3f1a06d52a2dc4e716b38918d9a@fr89.uk">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<p>I'd like to also say that I think the idea of having model A
based on the number of resources used, instead of fixed
categories, would be better. It would help encourage unused
resources to be transferred or returned.</p>
<div id="signature">---<br>
<p>Regards,<br>
Paul Lewis.</p>
</div>
<p><br>
</p>
<p id="reply-intro">On 2023-04-13 19:02, cowmedia.de wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family:
monospace">Hi Simon, <br>
<br>
by reading this email and checking the calculator again I have
the feeling<br>
that the "listening to the members" as you say was not
happening. A majority<br>
of the members want a usage based charging scheme (as per the
discussions on<br>
this mailing list) and this is completely not reflected. Just
adding some<br>
more categories with the highest still only arround 10K is not
sufficient. <br>
<br>
Also what I do not understand is that my personal account with
more or less<br>
one of the lowest resources you can get is already in Category
2?!?<br>
<br>
I can just repeat what I have already done:<br>
<br>
It should be billed by real resources used and directly
calculated not<br>
within categories<br>
Smaller LIRs should pay less and bigger LIRs should pay more<br>
It is important that there is an incentive to get rid of
unused resources<br>
and bring them back, this is only possible when you pay for
every resource<br>
separate, otherwise no-one will take care. <br>
<br>
I think this 3 models are not ready for vote and need to be
revised. <br>
Also Model 3 I completely do not understand. Why should
someone pay for<br>
transfers? This just means changes are going on and something
happens. Why<br>
these companies should then pay more? The "bad" companies are
the ones that<br>
do not implement IPv6 and their development just stall so
nothing happens. <br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">On Apr 12, 2023, at 09:45,
Simon-Jan Haytink <<a href="mailto:simonjh@ripe.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">simonjh@ripe.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Dear RIPE NCC members,<br>
<br>
I want to thank all those who contributed to the
consultation so far on</blockquote>
the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 and the model we should use
for the coming<br>
years.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
We can now share three draft models that we developed based
on input from</blockquote>
the members on the Members Discuss mailing list and in the
Charging Scheme<br>
Open House, as well as from the discussions at the recent
Executive Board<br>
Meeting.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
The result is that we are proposing three draft charging
scheme models:</blockquote>
one category-based and two that are based on the previous "one
LIR account,<br>
one fee" model. We hope to receive feedback on these models by
19 April so<br>
the Executive Board can propose the final versions on 26
April. The members<br>
will then vote on those three models at the upcoming General
Meeting on<br>
24-26 May.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
The three models all aim to fulfil a budget that is roughly
the same as</blockquote>
2023 plus general cost increases including inflation, so EUR
42-45 million.<br>
By doing this, we can ensure that we can meet the potential
budgetary<br>
requirements for 2024 while retaining the option for members
to redistribute<br>
any excess contributions should we receive excess funds. The
Activity Plan<br>
and Budget will be discussed with members this coming Autumn.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
The three models are available to review at:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<a
href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/cha"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/cha</a><br>
rging-scheme-2024-consultation
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
We also provide an updated calculator where members can see
for themselves</blockquote>
how much they might pay under the draft models:<a
href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/new"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/new</a><br>
-calculator-charging-scheme-2024.xlsx
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
To summarise the main features of the three models:<br>
<br>
Model A - Category Model<br>
<br>
This model has ten categories to provide greater
granularity. It also</blockquote>
charges separately for independent and legacy resources in
exactly the same<br>
way as in previous years. Additionally, a separate 50 EUR ASN
assignment fee<br>
has been added. Both separately charged resources do not
contribute to the<br>
category scores. This means there is no double charging and no
specific<br>
charging for transfers or administrative work carried out by
the RIPE NCC.<br>
There is a New /24 IPv4 administration fee to ensure there is
a financial<br>
consequence to joining the IPv4 Waiting List. The fee would be
payable upon<br>
receipt of the /24, and members joining the waiting list who
do not have an<br>
eligible LIR account, would pay the new LIR sign-up fee to
open a new LIR<br>
account and join the waiting list.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
With this model, approximately 68% of members would pay less
than the</blockquote>
current annual fee, with the remaining 32% paying more.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
The discussion with members helped us to see that a
category-based model</blockquote>
would receive significant support from members if the version
was<br>
simplified. Should members see the need to charge for other
elements, then<br>
that can be incorporated into the category model in the coming
years. Any<br>
such additional charges could potentially then reduce the fees
per category.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
Model B - Price increase and ASN fee<br>
<br>
This model is the exact same as in the previous ten years,
but there is a</blockquote>
price increase of EUR 150 and a 50 EUR ASN fee to ensure we
can meet our<br>
budgetary requirements while retaining the option for members
to<br>
redistribute any excess contribution should we receive excess
funds.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
Model C - Transfer fee and ASN fee<br>
<br>
This model is the exact same as in the previous ten years,
but there is a</blockquote>
charge of EUR 1,000 per transfer to be paid by the receiving
party and a 50<br>
EUR ASN fee to ensure we can meet our budgetary requirements
while retaining<br>
the option for members to redistribute any excess contribution
should we<br>
receive excess funds.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
Further information on the charging scheme models is
provided at:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<a
href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/cha"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/cha</a><br>
rging-scheme-2024-consultation/
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
The RIPE NCC Executive Board believes that a category-based
model is the</blockquote>
best option to help address uncertainty that might be caused
by<br>
consolidation with multiple LIRs and to provide greater
flexibility and<br>
fairness in how we charge members in the coming years.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
On 26 April, the final versions of the charging schemes that
members will</blockquote>
vote on will be published for the members to consider and
discuss. If you<br>
have comments on the draft charging schemes, we therefore ask
you to comment<br>
on the members-discuss mailing list by 19 April so we have
time to<br>
incorporate any feedback if necessary.
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><br>
Importantly, we ask all members to register for the RIPE NCC
General</blockquote>
Meeting where the final decision will be in your hands.
Register to<br>
participate and vote at:
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><a
href="https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active</a>
<br>
<br>
Simon-Jan Haytink<br>
Chief Financial Officer<br>
RIPE NCC<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
members-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">members-discuss@ripe.net</a><br>
<a
href="https://mailman.ripe.net/"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://mailman.ripe.net/</a><br>
Unsubscribe:<br>
<a
href="https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/info%40cowmedia.de"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/info%40cowmedia.de</a></div>
<br>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family:
monospace">_______________________________________________<br>
members-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">members-discuss@ripe.net</a><br>
<a
href="https://mailman.ripe.net/"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://mailman.ripe.net/</a><br>
Unsubscribe: <a
href="https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/paul.lewis%40fr89.uk"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/paul.lewis%40fr89.uk</a></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net">members-discuss@ripe.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mailman.ripe.net/">https://mailman.ripe.net/</a>
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/mail%40lseitz.de">https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/mail%40lseitz.de</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Lennart Seitz
PGP-Schlüssel: 0x187abd76a5660379 (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://pgp.lseitz.de/key.asc">https://pgp.lseitz.de/key.asc</a>)
--</pre>
</body>
</html>