This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ncc-services-wg] Splitted PI billing
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Splitted PI billing
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Splitted PI billing
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sergey Myasoedov
sergey at devnull.ru
Mon Jul 19 20:23:09 CEST 2010
Hi Max, as defined in RIPE-482, "a charge of EUR 50 for each independent Internet number resource". Each inetnum is a independent resource, even if your End User will receive /20+/22+/23+/24. If you wish to change this in 2011 Charging Scheme, you have to do it more clearly. I support your proposal. Monday, July 19, 2010, 6:13:35 PM, you wrote: MT> Recently RIPE NCC has assigned a PI network for my client. It is 1536 MT> IPs (/22+/23), and it was assigned as two completely different inetnums MT> (with one same netname). MT> I have asked how it will be billed, and got an answer - as two separate MT> objects. I understand, in future it will be harder and harder to get a MT> non-splitted networks, and splitted networks will be more frequent. MT> But how I can predict it in my agreements with customers? I don't know MT> how much pieces will be splitted the next network to. MT> When I said it will be twice more expensive than expected, customer was MT> unhappy and said there is an agreement already signed, with the exact MT> price in it. MT> I think, one request shold be billed as one object, isn't it? -- Sergey
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Splitted PI billing
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Splitted PI billing
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]