Dear Dirk,

A few facts from the other Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) may help
frame workable options.

RIR,How fees scale,How voting rights scale, Outcome

>**APNIC**
>Seven tiers based on total IPv4/IPv6 held; base fee + “bit-factor”
multiplier.
>1–64 votes per member (Associate = 1, Extra-Large = 64). 
>Operates since 2010 without corporate capture; board seats still
change hands regularly.

>**LACNIC**
>Annual fee rises from USD 600 (\</22) to > USD 20 k (≥/15).         
>1–11 votes per member, tied to category.
>No dominant company—community elections remain competitive.         
 
>**ARIN**
>13 fee brackets from USD 262.50 (/24) up to USD 256 000 (> /9).
>One vote per member; extra “weight” is only when one person represents
several distinct members.
>Again, no takeover despite very large holders.

1. A mixed model—flat base fee plus a progressive charge on address
holdings - is workable and accepted elsewhere.
2. Where voting power is proportional (APNIC, LACNIC), no evidence of
corporate domination has emerged; reputation and community oversight
keep behaviour in check.
3. Even ARIN’s flat-vote model demonstrates that steeply graduated fees
alone do not deter large members from supporting the registry’s public-
interest mission.

I've heard the concern that 'corporations will take over RIPE' raised
many times, over and over again. However, people seem to forget that
other RIRs have successfully managed corporate participation. Could
someone explain why this wouldn't work for RIPE? What makes RIPE
fundamentally different or special in this regard?

On Fri, 2025-05-30 at 22:05 +0200, D. Walde - Walde IT-Systemhaus
wrote:
> It's about fair distribution. And companies that earn millions should
> also understand that they have to do their share. And not just laugh
> and
> say, "Yeah, unfortunately, you came 30 years too late." You won't
> even
> be able to get started in the market.
>
> We need to come up with a new fee structure that is fair to all
> members.
>
> Yes, I'm exaggerating about the statement about millions. But it
> should
> be possible to even consider approaches to a fair model.
>
> Everyone should openly say how we could improve the model without
> being
> immediately punished by others. Suggestions are welcome. Just because
> the model is 30 years old doesn't necessarily make it good or fair.
>
> Suggestions are ideas, and they can be good, bad, or whatever. But
> that's what suggestions are about: the exchange of ideas and
> opinions.
>
> Just because I like chocolate ice cream the most doesn't mean
> everyone
> has to share my opinion. or even like ice cream.
>
> Greetings, Dirk
>

-----
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/members-discuss.ripe.net/
As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings.
More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/