Hi, All. The discussion about difference on IPv4 and IPv6 is interesting, but has little relevance to the issue. Since I started this topic discussion first, I would like to continue. We live in capitalism. The smart way to get someone to give up something valuable and necessary for everyone is to make them pay for it. I believe that at the moment the only reasonable way is to receive a payment for each subnet /24. The most damning argument I heard against it is that the NCC will be in this case a commercial organization. I don't understand! Why? Say me. Why: Receiving NCC funds for each PI block - is a non-commercial activity, but collecting for each /24 - is a commercial one. And why is a fee with 10 categories - is possible, but with 32000 categories - is impossible. In my opinion, the nature of an NCC activity is determined not by the way the fee is collected and not by its amount for each participant, but by the purpose of the company and the order of profit distribution. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. Serbulov Dmitry.
You are intentionally misleading this discussion, please open a new thread about IPv6 transition and discuss this subject with whom you want to. This thread's title is clearly about the charging scheme, not about IPv4 distribution nor about IPv6 transition.
On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 8:07 PM Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote: