Re: [members-discuss] My thoughts about the proposed Charging Scheme Models A and B (2027–2031)
Hi Ben! Of course I do agree that "whale customers" are not a good idea as well since this would put the independency of the RIPE NCC on risk. However, even if we would use a way more balanced category based model, we are still miles away from such a risk because I was not speaking about millions or even hundreds of thousands of fees for the largest LIRs. But it simply doesn't make much sense if the largest LIRs pay a few thousand EUR per year while even small LIRs pay a few thousand EUR per year as well. --Kayo
Hi there, Since RIPE can no longer provide every member with the resources they need, fairness is gone. Leaving the flat fee model can help mitigate this. With the current proposition I see two issues : 1. The maximum fee used for calculations (10k€) is too low. 2. Fees curve is too flat : Base fee apart, for one member with just one /22 it would cost 768€. For a member holding a /8 or equivalent, it is a cost of 0,53€ per /22. That's a really big discount. I can accept a ten times volume discount, but a 1500 times one? My attempt : The general idea is to say someone in top category (/7) will have 16x price reduction per block as per someone in (/22). In category /8 that would be 15x, /9 14x etc. Then we scale to the 30M€ budget + 10M€ of base fees. That gives, base fee included : *500* none *786* /24 to /23 *818* /23 to /22 *850* /22 to /21 *924* /21 to /20 *1,136* /20 to /19 *1,518* /19 to /18 *2,196* /18 to /17 *3,407* /17 to /16 *5,588* /16 to /15 *9,545* /15 to /14 *16,780* /14 to /13 *30,100* /13 to /12 *54,768* /12 to /11 *100,686* /11 to /10 *186,560* /10 to /9 *347,812* /9 to /8 *651,711* /8 to /7 The fee of one member of the highest category will represent about 1.5% of total income (we have 4 such members, see table in tab #2 of the Model_A spreadsheet). Compared with figures from the chart about other RIRs that make a fee /10 a bit below LACNIC. On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 5:29 PM Akayo <ripe@akayo.eu> wrote:
Hi Ben!
Of course I do agree that "whale customers" are not a good idea as well since this would put the independency of the RIPE NCC on risk.
However, even if we would use a way more balanced category based model, we are still miles away from such a risk because I was not speaking about millions or even hundreds of thousands of fees for the largest LIRs. But it simply doesn't make much sense if the largest LIRs pay a few thousand EUR per year while even small LIRs pay a few thousand EUR per year as well.
--Kayo
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
Hello, I would be OK with such an idea. It's not linear, as we know it would break too many things in term of agreement, but I kinda agree with that. The 10k maximum fee is *way* too low in the initial proposals, and that's the main problem I see here, as it has to be distributed on "(very) smaller" members. Kind regards, Clément Cavadore On Mon, 2026-01-19 at 19:11 +0100, Alexis Hanicotte via members-discuss wrote:
Hi there,
Since RIPE can no longer provide every member with the resources they need, fairness is gone. Leaving the flat fee model can help mitigate this.
With the current proposition I see two issues : 1. The maximum fee used for calculations (10k€) is too low. 2. Fees curve is too flat : Base fee apart, for one member with just one /22 it would cost 768€. For a member holding a /8 or equivalent, it is a cost of 0,53€ per /22. That's a really big discount. I can accept a ten times volume discount, but a 1500 times one?
My attempt : The general idea is to say someone in top category (/7) will have 16x price reduction per block as per someone in (/22). In category /8 that would be 15x, /9 14x etc. Then we scale to the 30M€ budget + 10M€ of base fees. That gives, base fee included : 500 none 786 /24 to /23 818 /23 to /22 850 /22 to /21 924 /21 to /20 1,136 /20 to /19 1,518 /19 to /18 2,196 /18 to /17 3,407 /17 to /16 5,588 /16 to /15 9,545 /15 to /14 16,780 /14 to /13 30,100 /13 to /12 54,768 /12 to /11 100,686 /11 to /10 186,560 /10 to /9 347,812 /9 to /8 651,711 /8 to /7
The fee of one member of the highest category will represent about 1.5% of total income (we have 4 such members, see table in tab #2 of the Model_A spreadsheet). Compared with figures from the chart about other RIRs that make a fee /10 a bit below LACNIC.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 5:29 PM Akayo <ripe@akayo.eu> wrote:
Hi Ben!
Of course I do agree that "whale customers" are not a good idea as well since this would put the independency of the RIPE NCC on risk.
However, even if we would use a way more balanced category based model, we are still miles away from such a risk because I was not speaking about millions or even hundreds of thousands of fees for the largest LIRs. But it simply doesn't make much sense if the largest LIRs pay a few thousand EUR per year while even small LIRs pay a few thousand EUR per year as well.
--Kayo
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members- discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/ To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members- discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
participants (3)
-
Akayo -
Alexis Hanicotte -
Clement Cavadore