<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1251"> </head> <body> <div dir="ltr"> <div> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: inherit;">If people are unhappy with the cost of renting addresses from cloud providers, hosting providers or ISPs, they should be able to move elsewhere where such</span><span style="font-size: inherit;"> fees aren't imposed on them. Most of these providers do have local, regional, or global </span><span style="font-size: inherit;">competitors. If they aren't moving the service offerings are compelling enough even when there is a slight charge per public IPv4 address.</span></div> <div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: inherit;"><br> </span></div> <div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: inherit;">As for limiting access, again, there seems to be ample amounts of addresses for sale by various brokers. Yes, technically the fixed cost would be different between the upstart and the established player w.r.t. addresses but does it matter? </span><span style="font-size: inherit;">The one-time cost for these is significantly less than what an average cloud shop spends on Google ads and marketing per day to make itself known.</span><br> </div> <div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: inherit;"><span></span></span></div> <div dir="ltr"><span></span></div> <div dir="ltr"><br> </div> <div dir="ltr"><span dir="ltr" style="text-decoration: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">I don�t think the RIRs should meddle in the business models of the LIRs, either.</span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" style="text-decoration:none"> </div> <div dir="ltr"><br> </div> <div dir="ltr"><br> </div> </div> </div> <div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature"> <div dir="ltr"><br> </div> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr">Kaj</div> <div dir="ltr"><br> </div> <div dir="ltr">Sent from my iPad</div> <div dir="ltr"><br> </div> </div> </div> <div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container" class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message"> <hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1"> <div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif"><b>From:</b> sdy@a-n-t.ru <sdy@a-n-t.ru><br> <b>Sent:</b> Saturday, April 20, 2024 1:41 PM<br> <b>To:</b> Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net><br> <b>Cc:</b> sdy@a-n-t.ru <sdy@a-n-t.ru>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net><br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: [members-discuss] Charging scheme 2025 proposal (logarithmic) <div> </div> </font></div> <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server"> <font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;"> <div class="PlainText">Kaj, sorry, but I am not agree with you.<br> <br> Unfortunately, with the current address management policy, this will never<br> happen ("The future is supposed to be about IPv6 anyway")!<br> <br> What is the point of doing a full migration to IPv6 for those who are now<br> 'selling' 1 IPv4 address for $12 a year? They don't pay even 1 cent for<br> it! This business will last forever, as well as migration to IPv6, unless<br> the community stops it by force.<br> <br> Big old companies and old small speculators, due to the connivance of old<br> RIR participants (and old LIRs too), have received a huge number of<br> addresses into management and are now using them with pleasure to make<br> profits and limit the access of new companies to the market. That is the<br> real picture of the networks world right now.<br> <br> ---<br> Serbulov Dmitry<br> <br> > I�m sure there is a lesson here somewhere but I�m kind of missing it. None<br> > of the examples you mentioned are coming back, either, and the world is<br> > probably better without.<br> ><br> > Hence, rather than beating the proverbial dead horse of IPv4 addresses,<br> > let it be. The future is supposed to be about IPv6 anyway.<br> ><br> ><br> ><br> > Kaj<br> ><br> > Sent from my iPad<br> ><br> > ________________________________<br> > From: sdy@a-n-t.ru <sdy@a-n-t.ru><br> > Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2024 1:00 PM<br> > To: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net><br> > Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net><br> > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Charging scheme 2025 proposal (logarithmic)<br> ><br> >>> All have been distributed a long time since, they're not coming back.<br> ><br> > A long time ago:<br> > - everything belonged to the king<br> > - there was slavery somewhere<br> > - there were dinosaurs<br> ><br> > Shall we continue? Or move into the future.<br> ><br> > -----------------------------<br> > Serbulov Dmitry<br> ><br> ><br> <br> <br> -----------------------------<br> � �� <br> �� "�� "<br> +7(498)785-8-000 ��.<br> +7(495)940-92-11 ��.<br> +7(925)518-10-69 ��.<br> <br> </div> </span></font></div> </div> </body> </html>