Well - they did. The mandate on the NCC was "make sure that LIRs are properly trained so they can do their job well" (which costs quite some money). Usually this is mainly paid by the "new LIR fees" - which is a reasonable approach - but this year there were much less new LIRs than planned in the budget, so there was a net loss.
I wholeheartedly agree with training being a core activity. It reduces the workload in the long term by not requiring quite so much handholding later. I am not against spending money - maybe I have been misunderstood. Again.
I think it's reasonable that the NCC plans with higher fees to ensure that they do not run the risk of going bankrupt - which would be a catastrophe - or that they have to significantly reduce expenses like "training" - which is something the LIR community has been explicitely asking for.
OK. I have *not* had time since recieving the invoice yesterday to go and read every budget report and annual report issued in 2002. I will. I cannot comment on this directly, but I will go and look at how the costs break down and formulate more informed opinions shortly. In the meanwhile I have asked (too late for bureaucrats probably, but I must try) to be invoiced quarterly, as this outrageous increase screws my cashflow for the next year. I am *not* in this for business or profit - like I have said I am supporting a leftover, legacy network and not-quite breaking even.
(Of course the "training" thing is just an example - but I still feel they are doing a reasonable job, and the costs are still in the range that they don't overload a commercial ISP's budget. For a non-commercial network and non-educational network, one has to face the question "is it necessary to be a LIR?")
For the last question, and for my circumstances, yes. There is not other way to get independent access to AS number(s) and address space. I have been royally screwed in the past (in different jobs, mind) by ISPs using the PA renumbering 'costs' to force retention of otherwise un-economic business. In terms of resilience - if that is your chosen route - BGP is essential, even if at the moment my specific circumstances dictate that I only have one puclic upstream (my private peering is my own affair). Relying on a 'foreign' LIR to issue and maintain an as-num or other RIPE objects is too risky. So, in my opinion, the RIPE fees have been worth the reduction of risk. Maybe now it is changing. I will be looking into the process of mergers and acquisitions through RIPE to see if there is a goal I can pursue to become an ex-LIR (much to the relief of some I suspect). Peter