- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
by Clément Cavadore 10 Apr '24

10 Apr '24

Hello Simon-Jan, colleagues, Excuse my wording, but: WTF is wrong ?! So, we are offered only 3 options, which are all unacceptable in my point of view (and, for sure, in many of the members I represent). Option A: Increase of 22.58%. Well, it's not like if the lir reduction was not predictible, since more than 10 years ago. And it's not like NCC does not have reserve. Option B: Increase of almost 21% *and* increase of sponsoring resources pricing. Almost worse, as it will require substancial paperwork for us, members, in order to either increase pricing on our own end users, or just let them try to find other LIRs. Option C: Still an increase (a bit lower, but still significant), and even more paperwork with end-users, as ASN are also included in the costs. I am really unhappy with all of those options, and I do not feel that NCC has listened to their membership. I still think this is unfair that extra large org do not pay some waaay more significant amount than smaller members. And I still don't get why NCC still wants to maintain such a budget. No, we are not members, we are just some financing- organisations, with no options, as RIPE has a monopoly on their "market". Please, change your billing options, and do not try to keep such a high budget. I am really disappointed about this draft scheme, and I do not want to vote for any option. This is so unfair. RIPE does not sounds anymore like a membership-based organisation to me. Regards, Clément Cavadore Le 10 avril 2024 11:18:19 GMT+02:00, Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh(a)ripe.net> a écrit : >Dear RIPE NCC members, > >We can now share three draft charging scheme models for 2025 that the Executive Board approved with the following resolution at its meeting on 25 March 2024: > >The RIPE NCC Executive Board approves the submission of the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 options to the upcoming RIPE NCC General Meeting for members to vote on. > >- Option A - Charging Scheme as is with 22.58% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,900) and a 0% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 50) >- Option B - Charging Scheme as is with 20.97% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,875) and a 50% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) >- Option C - Charging Scheme as is with 16.13% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,800), a 50% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) and a new AS Numbers fee of EUR 50 per assignment > >*Resources falling under this charge are IPv4 and IPv6 PI assignments; Anycast assignments; IPv4 and IPv6 IXP assignments; and Legacy IPv4 resource registrations through a sponsoring LIR. > >The full draft charging scheme models are available from the GM Documentation page: >https://www.ripe.net/membership/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2024/documentation… > >Although the proposed models are relatively simple, we provide a calculator where you can see exactly what you would pay under each of the proposed models: >https://www.ripe.net/documents/3757/CS2025_Member_Calculator.xlsx > >The main considerations for the Executive Board in proposing these three models are: >1. The consolidation of LIR accounts, which means the burden to generate sufficient income must be met by fewer accounts >2. Increased costs due to inflation that were previously catered for by the large number of LIR accounts >3. Following the discussions last year and again this year, there appears to be no clear consensus among members on how a category-based model would work and the Board does not wish to put another category model forward at the upcoming GM that will be rejected by the members. Rather, the Board will propose a simple model that guarantees adequate funding for 2025 and 2026 - under this proposal, we expect there would be no need for a fee increase for 2026. The Board will work with the RIPE NCC on a more in-depth consultation with the members aimed at arriving at a sustainable solution for 2027 and beyond, possibly involving a new charging scheme task force. > >All three proposed models are designed to arrive at the same income of EUR 41.1 million for the RIPE NCC in 2025. This will cover all current services and activities, a 5% staff cost increase, a 2% inflation increase on all non-staff costs, and EUR 1 million for additional work relating to registry complexity and security projects aimed at ensuring the resilience of the Registry and the RIPE NCC more broadly. Any such additional work would be discussed with the membership during Activity Plan and Budget consultations and then need to be approved by the Board. This will also allow some leeway should more LIR accounts close than we expect. > >It’s important to note that the RIPE NCC aims for an income budget that will provide a surplus, and this means that should we meet our budgetary targets, a surplus can be returned to members in 2026 should they so wish. > >While the RIPE NCC continues to carry out cost-cutting efforts across the organisation, drastically reducing the budget at this time is not advisable due to the work that needs to be carried out, especially in relation to maintaining high-quality registry services and securing the registry and RIPE NCC systems. Cutting services or activities is not something the Board is planning to do, and such actions would take time and need full consultation with the membership. An overview of the activities and services that the membership fee covers is provided below this email. > >I also urge you to see the presentation we delivered at the charging scheme open house in March so that the full context of the situation and the financial landscape we face is clear to you. The slides are available at: >https://www.ripe.net/membership/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-charging-schem… > >Finally, I want to thank all those who have contributed to the consultation so far on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025. The models we present here are draft and in two weeks we will announce the final proposal that members will vote on at the GM on 22-24 May. Please discuss the draft proposal on the members-discuss(a)ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> list - any input received by 19 April can be incorporated if possible into the final models we propose. And make sure to register for the GM so that you can vote on the charging scheme that will apply for you and all members next year: >https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active > >Simon-Jan Haytink >Chief Financial Officer >RIPE NCC > >Services and Activities Covered by the Member Fee > >- A trusted, efficient, accurate and resilient registry that guarantees uniqueness of resources held by members >- Neutral information services uninfluenced by commercial or government interests that allow both the RIPE NCC and the community to carry out useful research into the Internet >- Engagement activities, including RIPE and regional meetings, that build an active membership and community and that contribute to the overall good of the Internet >- A voice and influence for the membership in key decision-making fora, including with governments and regulators >- Protection of the Joint Internet Number Registry as developed by the Internet community >- Learning and development activities that help to address skills shortages and contribute to an educated membership >- Support for the Policy Development Process (PDP) >- An authoritative registry of routing information provided by RPKI and the RIPE Database >- K-root and DNS services >- A dedicated staff with considerable expertise contributing to all of the above -- Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec Courriel K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
by Gert Doering 10 Apr '24

10 Apr '24

Hi, On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 11:18:19AM +0200, Simon-Jan Haytink wrote: > - Option C - Charging Scheme as is with 16.13% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,800), a 50% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) and a new AS Numbers fee of EUR 50 per assignment Contrary to the to-be-expected flurry of mails expressing their dislike, I want to express my happiness with this one. As the address policy WG has stated a few times, we need an incentive for returning ASNs, and right now, there is only "the NCC has to ask again and again, and burn our money doing this". (I expect voting to, again, go against "fee per AS number", for reasons I do not understand - for the vast majority, this lowers the remaining fees, and per-customer ASNs can be billed just fine to the customers in question) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

1 0

Charging Scheme 2025
by Michel Lanners 10 Apr '24

10 Apr '24

Dear all, Why on earth is everybody trying to monetize IPv4, i.e. make RIPE fees dependant on IPv4 ressources? I completely fail to see why anybody should pay more for HOLDING any number of IPv4 ressources (or other ressources, by the way). It’s a different story for ressource transfers. So let those selling IPv4 pay a fee for the transfer! And for the rest let’s stick to a real membership fee: one price irrespective of which services you use or not. The fitness center doesn’t charge you per minute, nor per device you use. It's a flat membership, full stop. Hopefully low enough so it doesn’t create a problem for anybody's bottom line. Cheers Michel LANNERS CIO at LU-CIX Management G.I.E. -- <https://www.luxchat.lu/> Mail: michel.lanners(a)lu-cix.lu <mailto:michel.lanners@lu-cix.lu> Luxchat: @3eb2pdflrq57:01.lu-cix.luxchat.lu Phone: (+352) 28 99 29 92-81 LU-CIX Management G.I.E. 202, Z.A.E. Wolser F L-3290 Bettembourg lu-cix.lu <https://www.lu-cix.lu/> luxchat.lu <https://www.luxchat.lu/> luxembourg-internet-days.com <https://luxembourg-internet-days.com/> lunog.lu <https://www.lunog.lu/>

12 14

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight 10 Apr '24

10 Apr '24

Simon-Jan Thanks for sharing this. While nobody likes an increase in costs, the reality is that they are unavoidable. RIPE and the broader internet community is coming under increased scrutiny and regulation at both a local (national), regional and international level. Upcoming legislation such as NIS2 will increase the costs of compliance for many of us. And sadly good staff are both hard to find and not cheap. So while I’m not “delighted” by an increase I think the proposals are reasonable. The calculator is helpful for people like me who hate designing spreadsheets! Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours. From: ncc-announce <ncc-announce-bounces(a)ripe.net> on behalf of Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh(a)ripe.net> Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2024 at 11:52 To: ncc-announce(a)ripe.net <ncc-announce(a)ripe.net> Subject: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear RIPE NCC members, We can now share three draft charging scheme models for 2025 that the Executive Board approved with the following resolution at its meeting on 25 March 2024: The RIPE NCC Executive Board approves the submission of the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 options to the upcoming RIPE NCC General Meeting for members to vote on. - Option A - Charging Scheme as is with 22.58% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,900) and a 0% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 50) - Option B - Charging Scheme as is with 20.97% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,875) and a 50% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) - Option C - Charging Scheme as is with 16.13% price increase for the annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,800), a 50% price increase for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) and a new AS Numbers fee of EUR 50 per assignment *Resources falling under this charge are IPv4 and IPv6 PI assignments; Anycast assignments; IPv4 and IPv6 IXP assignments; and Legacy IPv4 resource registrations through a sponsoring LIR. The full draft charging scheme models are available from the GM Documentation page: https://www.ripe.net/membership/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2024/documentation… Although the proposed models are relatively simple, we provide a calculator where you can see exactly what you would pay under each of the proposed models: https://www.ripe.net/documents/3757/CS2025_Member_Calculator.xlsx The main considerations for the Executive Board in proposing these three models are: 1. The consolidation of LIR accounts, which means the burden to generate sufficient income must be met by fewer accounts 2. Increased costs due to inflation that were previously catered for by the large number of LIR accounts 3. Following the discussions last year and again this year, there appears to be no clear consensus among members on how a category-based model would work and the Board does not wish to put another category model forward at the upcoming GM that will be rejected by the members. Rather, the Board will propose a simple model that guarantees adequate funding for 2025 and 2026 - under this proposal, we expect there would be no need for a fee increase for 2026. The Board will work with the RIPE NCC on a more in-depth consultation with the members aimed at arriving at a sustainable solution for 2027 and beyond, possibly involving a new charging scheme task force. All three proposed models are designed to arrive at the same income of EUR 41.1 million for the RIPE NCC in 2025. This will cover all current services and activities, a 5% staff cost increase, a 2% inflation increase on all non-staff costs, and EUR 1 million for additional work relating to registry complexity and security projects aimed at ensuring the resilience of the Registry and the RIPE NCC more broadly. Any such additional work would be discussed with the membership during Activity Plan and Budget consultations and then need to be approved by the Board. This will also allow some leeway should more LIR accounts close than we expect. It’s important to note that the RIPE NCC aims for an income budget that will provide a surplus, and this means that should we meet our budgetary targets, a surplus can be returned to members in 2026 should they so wish. While the RIPE NCC continues to carry out cost-cutting efforts across the organisation, drastically reducing the budget at this time is not advisable due to the work that needs to be carried out, especially in relation to maintaining high-quality registry services and securing the registry and RIPE NCC systems. Cutting services or activities is not something the Board is planning to do, and such actions would take time and need full consultation with the membership. An overview of the activities and services that the membership fee covers is provided below this email. I also urge you to see the presentation we delivered at the charging scheme open house in March so that the full context of the situation and the financial landscape we face is clear to you. The slides are available at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-charging-schem… Finally, I want to thank all those who have contributed to the consultation so far on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025. The models we present here are draft and in two weeks we will announce the final proposal that members will vote on at the GM on 22-24 May. Please discuss the draft proposal on the members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> list - any input received by 19 April can be incorporated if possible into the final models we propose. And make sure to register for the GM so that you can vote on the charging scheme that will apply for you and all members next year: https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active Simon-Jan Haytink Chief Financial Officer RIPE NCC Services and Activities Covered by the Member Fee - A trusted, efficient, accurate and resilient registry that guarantees uniqueness of resources held by members - Neutral information services uninfluenced by commercial or government interests that allow both the RIPE NCC and the community to carry out useful research into the Internet - Engagement activities, including RIPE and regional meetings, that build an active membership and community and that contribute to the overall good of the Internet - A voice and influence for the membership in key decision-making fora, including with governments and regulators - Protection of the Joint Internet Number Registry as developed by the Internet community - Learning and development activities that help to address skills shortages and contribute to an educated membership - Support for the Policy Development Process (PDP) - An authoritative registry of routing information provided by RPKI and the RIPE Database - K-root and DNS services - A dedicated staff with considerable expertise contributing to all of the above

1 0

Ticket systems on member discuss
by Patrick Velder 10 Apr '24

10 Apr '24

Hi, once again this one very old topic. Since I've posted on this list, I'm prowd owner of 4 new accounts in random LIR's ticket systems. I think it's time to address this issue. Best regards Patrick

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme 2025
by sdy＠a-n-t.ru 10 Apr '24

10 Apr '24

And again.... It does not matter How much it will be paid this year per IPv4 to RIPE 10E or 0,001E per one IP. We NEED! We MUST to start take money for difficite resource - IPv4 and ASN 16b. First year it can be 1E per /24 and 1 AS. Next it will grow grow grow. So everyone will be need to pay or move to the next versions of protocols! So lets start with NO change in charge, but add some payment for resources to compensate inflation. Last my variant D: Stay payment as last year + 1E per each /24 + 1E per 16b AS > of course, that the fee per IP will change the price in the market. > > if there is no fee and it does not generate any costs then no one moves it. > > it's simple when you pay for something you have to consider whether to pay for the resource or sell it > > > > currently there are more than 15% of completely unused addresses. > > and I suppose that another 10% are addresses which, after cleaning up and paying fees, would be redundant or so insignificant that someone would either lease or sell them. > > > > Which may end up on the exchange which will result in a drop in price and better availability for all who need IPv4 addresses > > > > Translated with DeepL.com (free version) > > > > Best Regard’s / Pozdrawiam > > Gabriel Sulka > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Firma Handlowo - Usługowa KOMPEX > > 34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A > > tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00 > > www.kompex.pl ; bok(a)kompex.pl ; kompex(a)nowytarg.net > > > > From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net> On Behalf Of Daniel Pearson > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2024 3:44 PM > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme 2025 > > > > IPv4 sells in the private market for anywhere from $40-$50 per address. > > > > When a /24 is worth $10,000~ > > When a /22 is worth $40,000~ > When a /20 is worth $162,000~ > > Do you really think you will motivate someone to give them up by charging 0.1 EUR per address? > > That's just a fantasy. > > > > On 4/10/24 8:34 AM, Mihail Fedorov wrote: > > Hello. > > > > Because it solves both purposes > > > > - some small motivation for unused “hoarded” IP address space to be distributed back to those who suffer from total lack of them - at least a little bit will go back to market. There are still really A LOT of entities who hoard them not for the purpose of need (now or in future, commercial or not), but ONLY because some time ago v4 distribution was not managed properly. This, per my opinion, should be somehow resolved. > > > > - small LIR’s without large clients or subnets should not fund RIPE expensive projects on equal basis with transcontinental corporations. Latter will easily agree on 100x price increase just to knock off anyone else - still not even notice this fee. But existing fee and its increase is more than significant for smaller networks or someone trying to enter market. > > > > What I see in proposed schemes is total lack of choice. Let’s not pretend that increase to 1800, increase 1850 or increase to 1900 is actually a choice. It is not! And what I see in this mailing list is that almost everyone agree with this fact. > > > > My initial proposal remains the same: 0.1 EUR (adjusted to real RIPE financial needs) per v4 address in use. Absolutely flat and fair. It will be eventually distributed up to the IP end user by supply chain and be totally unnoticeable for them. > > > > At least there should be couple of more options in vote if community opinion really counted. Otherwise vote is nonsense, why it is needed at all? > > > > > > > > On 10 Apr 2024, at 16:09, Евгений Удовихин <mailto:eudovihin@gmail.com> <eudovihin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > At least because large IP holders now have no motivation to release them. The dependence of the contribution on the number of addresses used will give an additional incentive not to keep unnecessary address space. > > > > Ср, 10 апр. 2024 г. в 22:59, Michel Lanners <michel.lanners(a)lu-cix.lu <mailto:michel.lanners@lu-cix.lu> >: > > Dear all, > > > > Why on earth is everybody trying to monetize IPv4, i.e. make RIPE fees dependant on IPv4 ressources? > > > > I completely fail to see why anybody should pay more for HOLDING any number of IPv4 ressources (or other ressources, by the way). > > > > It’s a different story for ressource transfers. So let those selling IPv4 pay a fee for the transfer! > > > > And for the rest let’s stick to a real membership fee: one price irrespective of which services you use or not. The fitness center doesn’t charge you per minute, nor per device you use. It's a flat membership, full stop. Hopefully low enough so it doesn’t create a problem for anybody's bottom line. > > > > Cheers > > > > Michel LANNERS > > CIO at LU-CIX Management G.I.E. > > -- > > <https://www.luxchat.lu/> > > Mail: michel.lanners(a)lu-cix.lu <mailto:michel.lanners@lu-cix.lu> > > Luxchat: @3eb2pdflrq57:01.lu-cix.luxchat.lu <http://01.lu-cix.luxchat.lu/> > > Phone: (+352) 28 99 29 92-81 > > > > LU-CIX Management G.I.E. > > 202, Z.A.E. Wolser F > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/202,+Z.A.E.+Wolser+F?entry=gmail&source=g> > > L-3290 Bettembourg > > lu-cix.lu <https://www.lu-cix.lu/> > > luxchat.lu <https://www.luxchat.lu/> > > luxembourg-internet-days.com <https://luxembourg-internet-days.com/> > > lunog.lu <https://www.lunog.lu/> > > > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss(a)ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/eudovihin%40gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> members-discuss(a)ripe.net > <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss> > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: > <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/mihail%40fedorov.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/mihail%40fedorov.net > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss(a)ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/daniel%40privatesyst… > > > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss(a)ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/sdy%40a-n-t.ru ----------------------------- С уважением Сербулов Дмитрий ООО "Альфа Нет Телеком" +7(498)785-8-000 раб. +7(495)940-92-11 доп. +7(925)518-10-69 сот.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
by Hank Nussbacher 04 Apr '24

04 Apr '24

On 29/03/2024 14:49, Gert Doering wrote: IUCC was the first paying member to RIPE NCC in 1995 (since we realized the importance of supporting such a fledgling organization) and we have paid for our resources for the past 29 years. See attached (page 3 of 4 pages - if anyone wants to see the full 4 page document - drop me an email off-list). Regards, Hank > >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote: >>> My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional >>> resources a >>> company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time of joining >>> Ripe. >> >> ... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in >> 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards. Back >> then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP... >> >> So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a >> yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've >> been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already). >> >> Gert Doering >> -- NetMaster >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> members-discuss mailing list >> members-discuss(a)ripe.net >> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss >> Unsubscribe: >> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/hank%40interall.co.il

13 17

Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
by ivaylo 02 Apr '24

02 Apr '24

1 LIR = 1 Vote If you want 2 Votes, always can register other company as LIR. And you again will pay 1500 euro and have same resource limits (before next step up = +1500): 1 x /20 IPV4 block 1 x /29 IPV6 block 8 ASNs If we have more than 1 Vote for a LIR, based on the fee (fee: 4500, have 3 Votes), that will lead to monopol, mastodont companies will do what they want will vote and accept decisions only for their interests. And I can not call it democracy nor fair for all. Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Evgeniy Brodskiy wrote: > Confidential/????????????? > > Hi Ivaylo, just to clarify, if some LIR pay for 2 chank of resource does it mean it has 2 votes ?? > If contribution is not equal why votes should be equal ?? > > ----------------- > Best regards, > > Evgeniy Brodskiy > Kyivstar | Network engineer > Kyiv, Ukraine > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net> On Behalf Of ivaylo > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 4:54 PM > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available > > [????? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ????????? ?????????? ????? ??? ivaylo(a)bglans.net. ??????????, ???? ?? ???????: https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > Every Year we talking same things and every year the result is zero... > > Clearly it is not fair company which holds /22 IPV4 /32 IPV6 and few ASN to pay same amount as a company with /8 IPV4 /20 IPV6 and tens (if not > hundreds) ASNs. > > Clearly charging scheme based on the holded resource not accepting. Well then why not we think about hard coded resource limits for each member: > > Annual fee of 1500 Euro per LIR gives : > 1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22) > 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32...) > 8 x ASNs > > If a LIR pass one or more of the above parameters the applied Annual fee > +1500 Euro, so such LIR can hold and manage: > > 2 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum) > 2 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum) > 16 x ASN > > If again pass one or more of these +1500 Euro and so on. > > > RIPE to send emails to each member with calculation for its next year fee, and with ask to free resources and return back to RIPE. Newly freed resources to be spread across members who not reach the first target (or at least to can ask for new resources without additional fee): > > 1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22 e.t.c.) > 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32... e.t.c) > 8 x ASNs > > To legacy resource holders to be given 1 year, to find sponsoring LIR, and their resources to be counted in the LIR account sum resources. Or to be asked to become LIRs, with 500 euro one pay joining fee. > > > > This way RIPE can predict and calculate its bugdet much better. > > > > Ivaylo Josifov > VarnaIX / Varteh LTD > +359 52 969393 > Varna, Bulgaria > > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Firma KOMPEX wrote: > >> Hi >> >> it would be fair if the resource was not valued as a resource only as >> the number of IPs IP should be the basis for settlement - it is >> actually a cost there is a shortage of addresses, and some people have >> a lot of them unused and do not return them. >> If they paid for the addresses and it was a cost for them, they would >> wonder whether they really need them or whether it would be better to >> return some of them. >> >> Pozdrawiam >> Gabriel Sulka >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> Firma Handlowo - Us?ugowa KOMPEX >> 34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A >> tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00 >> http://www.k/ >> ompex.pl%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0ba >> c9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6 >> 38473209301289732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoi >> V2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vRog6oP4 >> cUl4jHHJwJtNmslrzbOIHlONn0zSTZyVOW8%3D&reserved=0 ; bok(a)kompex.pl ; >> kompex(a)nowytarg.net >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net> On Behalf Of >> Gert Doering >> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:49 PM >> To: domain(a)wkey.it >> Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net >> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: >> Recording and Slides Available >> >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote: >>> My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional >>> resources a company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time >>> of joining >> Ripe. >> >> ... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in >> 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards. Back >> then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP... >> >> So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a >> yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've >> been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already). >> >> Gert Doering >> -- NetMaster >> -- >> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? >> >> SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael >> Emmer, >> Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler >> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann >> D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) >> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> members-discuss mailing list >> members-discuss(a)ripe.net >> https://list/ >> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvgen >> iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd >> 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638473209301298466%7CUnknown%7CTW >> FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6 >> Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zGN5MtVkwMRKjIKh8U8zUxrmFFkQrZJ4eiuEv%2B >> RKwu8%3D&reserved=0 >> Unsubscribe: >> https://list/ >> s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fivaylo%2540bglans.n >> et&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e230 >> 1e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6384732093 >> 01303571%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiL >> CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p4kryouKS1u%2F%2F >> mNi3sDc3friXMlh5MIiUrR8nVxR5m0%3D&reserved=0 >> > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss(a)ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/registry%40kyivstar.… >

12 14

RIPE NCC Quarterly Planning Q2 2024
by Adonis Stergiopoulos 02 Apr '24

02 Apr '24

Dear colleagues, We have now published the Q2 2024 quarterly plans for our development teams: https://www.ripe.net/support/documentation/quarterly-planning <https://www.ripe.net/support/documentation/quarterly-planning> Our plans include the work that will be carried out in the next few months and give you the opportunity to comment on those plans and suggest items that the RIPE NCC should be working on going forward. The plans cover the following areas: - Learning & Development - RIPE Database - Business Applications, including the LIR Portal, Registry Services and other applications. - DNS and K-root - RIPE Atlas - RIPEstat - Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) - Routing Information Service (RIS) - Information Security, Risk, and Compliance We have also made some changes to our reporting process. First, following our website refresh, we made it easier to identify the completed work items of previous quarters. You can check this by clicking on the ‘Archived Plans’ sub-page for each area. Second, we have decided to discontinue reporting on our ‘Information Technology (IT)’ area as we could only provide limited details, and the information was mostly relevant to internal teams. The previous IT plans will remain active on our website until they expire as part of our archiving process. If you have any questions or any input on these plans, please reach out to us. Kind regards, Adonis Stergiopoulos Senior Marketing & Communications Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Questions about the published Draft Agenda and Supporting Documents
by Erik Bais 30 Mar '24

30 Mar '24

Dear Hans Petter, Thank you for providing the supporting documents for the GM in Rome. Before we are going to be in Rome, I have a question for you and I cc:'ed the member-discuss ML, as I'm sure some other members might also have a couple questions on the following topic. I would like to ask you, how the RIPE NCC thought it was a great slide to present just a 2Milj Euro budget cut .. as if it was the best it could do .. given that it was stated on the last GM .. that it wasn't going to increase the budget .. And with the inflation, basically what that means .. you need to cut cost and cut hard ... So I would assume that the Director of the NCC .. would see this as an opportunity ... and discuss with management and staff, what is excessive .. and where can we 'kill our darlings' ... As for any writer that needs to do proper editing of a long novel .. I get the feeling that you didn't went/wanted to go through that process .. not as fierce as that the membership have suggested you to do .. And I would suggest that this budget document, need some serious editing ... One of the reasons for my disbelieve that you did that process already properly .. is that if I see an IT spend of 7.6 milj. Euro (2023 ) and you proudly present that the IT spend for 2024 is going to be 7.4 milj Euro .. Either you have a HUGE technical debt that you can't manage .. or you didn't went head to head with your CTO / IT Director ... and stopped asking for more cuts until he actually sad in your office crying in despair. Just an example ... If I'm correct, the RIPE NCC is currently in a datacenter facility in Amsterdam .. with roughly 80 cabinets filled with $random equipment, almost half of that (most likely as my gut feeling is ) to store and hold every single ICMP ping/trace life on disk etc.. since the conception of the Atlas project.. And the best you can come back to the community is .. we've managed to reduce the cost of Atlas with 50.000 euro p/yr ? The proper question to ask is, do we need every freaking completed test to store that into infinity on spinning disks .. because we never asked the community if we can just through away every PING test result after 60 days . and save 20 cabinets in storage, equipment and power usage. Who are you kidding ... And that colocation / hw cost is next to the already half milj. Euro charge for the public cloud (AWS) already (per year..) So I seriously wonder if you asked the right questions instead of just tried to maintain the status quo ... One of those 'services' that I seriously think that the NCC should step away from .. is providing 'secondary' DNS server for reverse dns .. I mean .. come on .. how hard is that for the community to manage that by themselves .. and just because the NCC did that since the conception of the NCC ( or at least longer than I can remember ) .. is that still something that people use and expect the NCC to provide ? It might be good suggestion to setup an impartial task force / audit team.. reporting to the Executive Board (EB) .. that does (IT) spending audits .. looking for projects that are WAY over budgets, technical debt, overspending due to historic reasoning etc.. These should be externals to the RIPE NCC (staff), but with lots of different views and know how to spot a pet project when they see one .Or project, because we always did it that way. And then report to the EB with suggestions on how to act on it. I think it is then up to the EB, to discuss those findings internally and decide to have the discussion with the RIPE NCC Management on how to change and reduce the technical debt and how to actual cut cost. I have a gut feeling that the EB isn't getting all the information during the EB meetings or during the follow up's or it takes AGES to obtain the information or it is based on consolidated info, with 3 layers of management cutting and rewriting in between. The "Kill Your Darlings Audit Team" ( KYDAT ), should be the fresh look, to see if the NCC is still doing the right things .. and if the RIPE NCC management is managing towards a more agile and leaner future. This doesn't mean .. let's host everything at the public cloud and see how long the credit card keeps clearing .. it means that common sense with eye's from the outside of the RIPE NCC, might help to provide a better insight. The benefit of KYDAT is that they aren't 'burdened' with employee politics or with smoke and mirrors of certain management that is withholding / stalling documents of how bad it really is .. they will look for themselves .. and report and suggest. I don't envy the role that you have been tasked with ... But I was expecting something more serious .. Regards, Erik Bais

16 32