Dear RIPE NCC team , Thank you for opening Phase 1 of the Charging Scheme consultation and for providing clear explanations and interactive calculators for both proposed models. As a small Internet Service Provider, my primary concern is ensuring that the annual fee model does not unintentionally penalise natural, incremental growth. Small providers often need to request additional IPv4 or IPv6 resources gradually in order to serve local communities, improve network resilience, or meet regulatory and operational requirements. Any model that results in sudden or disproportionate fee increases due to minor changes in resource holdings would place an undue burden on such providers. From this perspective, I see potential risks in category-based models, where crossing a category boundary can trigger a significant fee increase that does not accurately reflect the actual scale of growth or the provider’s financial capacity. While category-based approaches may be simpler to understand, they can introduce inequities at the margins. A formula-based model, if carefully designed, could better reflect the principle of equity by linking fees more smoothly to actual resource usage. However, it is essential that the formula remains transparent, predictable, and not overly sensitive to small changes in IPv4 or IPv6 holdings. I would encourage the RIPE NCC to prioritise: Smooth fee progression without abrupt jumps Appropriate protection for small and medium-sized providers Clear predictability to support long-term planning and sustainable growth I appreciate that the figures presented at this stage are illustrative and look forward to continued discussion as the models evolve. Kind regards, Aiham Mahfud Lazernet