[ncc-services-wg] Transferring responsibility for PI space from LIRa to LIRb

Dear Wilfried and all,

When making a transfer of one or more allocation or assignment from one 
registry
to another we charge a one-time administration fee, currently EUR 1,000. 
This fee
is also charged when one registry takes over another registry.

The scoring of IPv4 PI space in the billing score of a registry counts at 
the moment as
one time score taken into account to determine the billing category of a 
registry.
Only PI space assigned in the last 12 months is taken into account.

Historically this has changed in 2004 we introduced a new charging scheme 
structure
including IPv6, ASNs and IPv4 PI space into the billing score algorithm. 
IPv4 PI and PA
blocks scored identical, all allocations / assignments were taken into 
account including
blocks "older" than 1 year. Of course the relevance towards a registry 
score of PI blocks
was small as the PI blocks are generally smaller than PA. We received 
several comments
from registries who argued that the PI blocks they were scored for were 
used by customers
who did not do any business anymore with them. They perceived it as unfair 
to be scored
for a resource they had nothing to do with.

In 2005 we amended the billing score so that only the PI blocks from the 
last 12 months
were taken into account (a one time score towards the billing score) and 
the weight of the
score of PI blocks was increased. In 2006 we maintained the same scoring 
and only changed
the wording (which still needs a bit of improvement as already pointed out).

For more information see the Charging Schemes 2005 - 2006:
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-293.pdf
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-330.pdf
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-360.pdf

So I will use this opportunity to ask you for feedback on the scoring of PI 
space so that
we can take the feedback into account for the charging scheme 2007.

Regards,


Jochem de Ruig
RIPE NCC

At 10:02 PM 5/17/2006 +0000, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
>Sascha Lenz wrote:
>
> > Hi,
>
>OMG, that's an interesting way of hiding it ;-)
>
> > ...probably the Charging Scheme next year excludes Pre-Oct2005 PI/AS
> > Assignments so we're back to "one time fee"
> >
> > But that's not really clear from the document itself, just by reading
> > the previous, obsoleted charging scheme documents (ripe-330)...
>
>I kept re-reading and searching this text, but was too stupid to succeed
>in reverse engineering that clause. Sigh.
>
>I'll talk to Jochem to try and get it re-worded - unless it is done
>"on purpose".
>
>Thanks to all who contributed!
>Wilfried.