Hello Simon,
I’m sorry to say that I didn’t have the time to read all the feedback that was already on this list, or the background information you published. Still, I’d like to give quick feedback to the proposed fees. I’m limiting myself to those positions I have an opinion on.
New Member Sign-up Fee: EUR 1,000
- Sure, signups cause work and the costs need to be paid somehow.
LIR Account Sign-up Fee (additional LIR account): EUR 1,500
IPv4 Waiting List Sign-up Fee: EUR 2,000
IPv4 Allocation Fee (from waiting list): EUR 750
- Wait, what? This is basically selling IPv4 space for 4250 € (split into three payments). I thought we aren’t in the business of selling resources.
- The additional LIRs were a fiction that is no longer relevant if we move to a member-based charging model. Get rid of that in favor of other methods.
- Why exactly does signup of a LIR for an existing member make more work and as such require a higher signup fee than member signup, anyway?
- Instead, I would prefer to just allow a member to book one or more places on a “waiting list” service, which has a fixed yearly fee. Maybe increase the fee per place the more places a member books. When the member receives an IPv4 block, their place on the waiting list gets re-added to the bottom of the list. That way it’s not a selling of IP space, it’s a service provided.
Additional ASN Fee: EUR 50
- Why is an ASN a different resource than an IP network?
Merger and Acquisition Fee: EUR 500
- I think that such a fee makes sense as it produces work for RIPE NCC.
50% discount for educational institutions
- Why? We’re not talking small schools here; we’re talking large universities. Those who are big enough to be members of RIPE are large corporations by themselves.
- I believe some of those were “early adopters” and have larges address space. Maybe if the don’t want to pay much they could just implement NAT?
- The idea why companies like Microsoft subsidize educational institutions is to push their product in front of students in the expectations that those students get used to it and then keep on using the products in their future life. I don’t expect many students to become RIPE members just because their university was one.
- To be clear, I don’t have numbers backing that up or anything, these are just my assumptions.
Discount for members in lower income countries
- I like the idea on principle, but I worry about finding a way to implement that fairly that doesn’t trigger years of complaining by everyone. I believe this should not be part of the original charging scheme vote and if members want to implement it, make it a separate vote after the charging scheme is implemented.
Just my two cents.
Von: Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh@ripe.net>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. März 2026 13:17
An: ncc-announce@ripe.net
Betreff: [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme - Share your Feedback
Dear members,
There is still time to provide any input you might have before we publish the final charging scheme options to be voted on by the membership in May. The RIPE NCC Executive Board will decide on the draft charging scheme options for members to vote on at their meeting on 26 March and will review all feedback received from the membership.
These options could lead to significant changes to the fees you will pay. While many members may see a fee decrease, others could see substantial increases.
Please review the consultation pages and provide input on the members-discuss mailing list:
https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/member-and-community-consultations/cs-model-consultation-phase-1/
https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/member-and-community-consultations/charging-scheme-model-consultation-phase-2/
In April, following the Executive Board meeting, we will publish the draft charging scheme proposals for your review.
And please remember to register to vote at the GM:
https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active
Kind regards,
Simon-Jan Haytink
Chief Financial Officer
RIPE NCC