- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

Billing Changes in 2019
by Christian Kaufmann 17 Jan '19

17 Jan '19

(Now with webstream link included). Dear members, The board has been following this discussion with great interest and I think now is the right time to comment. Over the past two years, your feedback has been that the RIPE NCC should be looking to increase efficiency and that processes should be automated and optimised as much as possible. We heard you and we acted on this. In 2017, the organisation received 11,000 billing tickets for around 17,000 members. Any company that has to answer more than one billing query for every two of its customers should be taking a hard look at its processes. One of our initiatives was to look at what creates the most work, and this is tickets processed by the RIPE NCC. Quarterly billing is a massive source of additional work in this respect and we decided to simplify this process by moving to a single annual payment (which is how the bulk of the membership currently pays its fees). This was presented on a few months ago at the last General Meeting (webstream link at the bottom of this email): https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/october-2018/ripe-ncc… While under no obligation to do so, the RIPE NCC has offered quarterly payments to its members for a long time. This dates back to when the membership fee for a small LIR was almost double what it is today. Continuing to offer this service has become less practical as the membership has grown. It is not the sending and processing of invoices that is the issue - this is about as automated as it can be. The problem is the amount of reminders, queries and other communication that comes with each billing cycle. This is getting worse as the membership grows, especially with the opening of multiple LIRs. Recognising that this that might cause inconvenience for some members, we instructed the RIPE NCC to offer an individual payment plan on request. The RIPE NCC will soon provide more details on how it intends to manage this transition for members that require support. If you will be negatively impacted, please contact the RIPE NCC via this option. Not only will it mean they can help you individually, but it will also let us see how many members will be affected. This mailing list is not always a representative sample. The RIPE NCC is here to support you and your business. If the new rule creates more harm than benefits for the membership, then we can always revisit our approach. Best regards Christian Kaufmann Chairman of the Executive Board GM webstream (financial update starts at 21:50): https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/october-2018/webstream

1 0

Billing Changes in 2019
by Christian Kaufmann 17 Jan '19

17 Jan '19

Dear members, The board has been following this discussion with great interest and I think now is the right time to comment. Over the past two years, your feedback has been that the RIPE NCC should be looking to increase efficiency and that processes should be automated and optimised as much as possible. We heard you and we acted on this. In 2017, the organistaion received 11,000 billing tickets for around 17,000 members. Any company that has to answer more than one billing query for every two of its customers should be taking a hard look at its processes. One of our initiatives was to look at what creates the most work, and this is tickets processed by the RIPE NCC. Quarterly billing is a massive source of additional work in this respect and we decided to simplify this process by moving to a single annual payment (which is how the bulk of the membership currently pays its fees). This was presented on a few months ago at the last General Meeting (webstream link at the bottom of this email): https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/october-2018/ripe-ncc… While under no obligation to do so, the RIPE NCC has offered quarterly payments to its members for a long time. This dates back to when the membership fee for a small LIR was almost double what it is today. Continuing to offer this service has become less practical as the membership has grown. It is not the sending and processing of invoices that is the issue - this is about as automated as it can be. The problem is the amount of reminders, queries and other communication that comes with each billing cycle. This is getting worse as the membership grows, especially with the opening of multiple LIRs. Recognising that this that might cause inconvenience for some members, we instructed the RIPE NCC to offer an individual payment plan on request. The RIPE NCC will soon provide more details on how it intends to manage this transition for members that require support. If you will be negatively impacted, please contact the RIPE NCC via this option. Not only will it mean they can help you individually, but it will also let us see how many members will be affected. This mailing list is not always a representative sample. The RIPE NCC is here to support you and your business. If the new rule creates more harm than benefits for the membership, then we can always revisit our approach. Best regards Christian Kaufmann Chairman of the Executive Board

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by ripe-lr＠cidr.eu 17 Jan '19

17 Jan '19

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] Billing scheme
by Terrence Koeman 16 Jan '19

16 Jan '19

Allowing quarterly payments on a yearly fee in the past definitely *was* an "indulgency". It's nowhere in the billing schedule. It was a "gift" , because at the start of the year you owe RIPE the complete annual fee to get membership for a year. If they let you pay in quarterly terms and you pay 1/4th of the fee at the start of the year, you still get membership for a *year* (and NOT membership for only the 1st quarter). Therefore they are essentially loaning you (extending credit for) the other 3/4ths: 1/4th for 3 months, 1/4th for 6 months and the last 1/4th for 9 months. They charge 0% interest, while at 6% yearly interest (about market rate) this would normally cost (5.25 2nd + 10.50 3rd + 15.75 4th) = €31.50. And that's not even including compound interest or inflation. The last 1/4th they get is worth less than the first 1/4th due to inflation, so offering quarterly payments was not free for RIPE; they were losing money on it. So, in fact this service RIPE offered was paid for by *all* members, not just the members paying quarterly. This change also rules out the liability to RIPE of members that pay in terms and then go bankrupt during the year, leaving RIPE out the rest of the terms. Or otherwise don't pay, causing RIPE to have to pay for, or spend time on, collection. Since RIPE only gets money from membership fees, in the end will be the members that will have to pay for everything that costs RIPE money. Depending on the number of LIRs, due to this change, the annual membership fee will probably go down for all of us, or we will get (more) back at the end of the year. Why am I against quarterly payments? Obviously the subsidizing explained above, but more importantly: like you, many others don't seem to get that RIPE membership is *not* a pay-as-you-need subscription. It's a *yearly* membership fee. You owe the full year up front and then you get membership for a full year. This is completely separate from how many terms they let you pay the fee in. While you (and others) seem to think that the membership fee is like a phone subscription, in fact its more like buying a singular thing like a car. Some dealers also offer car sales where you can pay in terms or the second half of the purchase price after 2 years (or something like that) with 0% interest. But this is not free for them, it's essentially a *discount* they're providing you (as you'd have to pay a bank interest if you had to loan the money for those terms or 2 years somewhere else, you save money, while the car dealer incurs a loss due to inflation). You get to take the car home immediately and start using it, but that doesn't mean the car purchase has now turned into a pay-as-you-need subscription. Its the same w/ the RIPE membership: you pay for a singular thing; *one* service. That one single service is *one* year of RIPE membership, and you get to, and can, use it immediately. The constant confusion about the difference and resulting complaints and accusations on this list are a nuisance and we can do without them. Clearly the option for payment in terms for a singular annual fee is too complex for some, especially for some with more than one LIR. I'm sure RIPE has had to waste a lot of time explaining this over and over and over, as people have on this list as well. So, they removed the complexity so it saves RIPE and us on the list time, nuisance & money. IMO RIPE shouldn't have acted like a bank in the first place. I hope this explains it :) -- Regards, Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. Please quote relevant replies. Spelling errors courtesy of my 'smart'phone. ________________________________ From: Larisa Yurkina <ula(a)ripn.net> Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2019 12:38 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Billing scheme Terrence Koeman пишет 08.01.2019 21:49: Hi, >>> In fact, it's made clear that the fees are an "annual payment" >> No, it's a fee every member pays per year. Show me where it's stated >> that we have to pay that in just one part. > Right here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/member-support/payment/ripe-ncc-billing-pr… > > That agrees with the charging scheme, which says "[..] for 2019, the annual service fee per LIR account will remain at EUR 1,400". That's fully consistent with the billing procedure. > > It doesn't say there will be a quarterly fee of EUR 350, the fact that quarterly terms were possible in the past was a courtesy. So, *you* show *me* where it says they can't stop extending this courtesy that was never voted upon. I don't think that words like 'gift' and 'courtesy' are really siutable here. As a memeber i pay on time for services i get and do not need any indulgencies at all. I prefer quarterly payments, why not? They are more convenient to me. You prefer yearly, - fine, i whish you good luck and much success. But, how do my quarterly payments affect your yearly, I can't understand. Why you are against them? And some more. Why the Executive Board memebers or the RIPE NCC staff still keep silence inspite of this many-days discussion? If some of them could explain the reason of chanding the billing scheme i'd be grateful. Perhaps the reason is really very serious. Thank you. > >> In my employment contract they write XXXXX CHF "per year", but I get it >> paid out in 12 parts too.... > Then either your employer is free to change your salary to a quarterly or yearly payment whenever they feel like it too, or, what I'm guessing is more likely: Swiss law dictates that the payment of salaries is per month (for tax purposes or whatever) and so it's not necessary to specify it in your contract. Alternatively, some union contract or something similar arranges this and your employment contract incorporates it by reference. > > Whatever the case may be in Switzerland, in The Netherlands an employment contract will state that it's paid in 12 or 13 terms plus the day of the month it will be paid on (in addition to the yearly amount). > > Ask the HR department tomorrow if you can be paid per week instead and they'll explain to you where it's written that it has to be paid per month and not otherwise, because it's sure to be written somewhere. This also states quite matter-of-factly "Salaries in Switzerland are paid once a month": https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/salaries/29235700 > > And, even if it isn't defined anywhere, the RIPE billing procedure is not your Swiss employment contract. So what's your point exactly? You feel RIPE should be bound to whatever law, rule, regulation or convention causes your salary to be paid per month? -.- > >>> Apparently, RIPE offers "payment options for members with cash flow >> limitations", so it seems that RIPE is willing to work with members for >> which this change is a problem. These members should contact RIPE directly >> to see what "payment options" are available to them >> >> It's a "transition plan" - that means, it's probably just for this year: > Yes, obviously the plan is to: > > a). require all new members to pay yearly, > b). require members opening additional LIRs to pay yearly, > so that: > c). all members pay yearly as soon as possible. > > Of course existing members can be surprised by the sudden change this year and may not be able to pay yearly immediately, hence a "transition" for them. But, next year they won't be surprised and they have a whole year to save & plan for the yearly payment. > >>> For members with only one LIR account, we will design a transition plan >>> for those with cash flow limitations and who therefore have difficulty >>> meeting the payment schedule. We will provide details about this in >>> January 2019. >> I expect the RIPE NCC to inform its members about their transition plans. > Well, then you're in luck, because they will inform their members in >>> January 2019. > It seems to me that to come to a reasonable transition policy they need insight into what problems members will have, and they're getting this insight now. > >>> ideally *before* complaining on this list. >> Please show me any complaint from my side? Thanks :-) > Well, are you a "member with cash flow limitations"? Because my full sentence addressed this only to "these" members (as a group), of which a few had already complained on this list. Not to you personally, as I had no way of knowing whether you belonged to this group or not. > > But besides that: > > complaint noun > com·plaint | \kəm-ˈplānt \ > 1 : expression of grief, pain, or dissatisfaction > >> Why are we able to vote about every single word which is inserted, >> changed or removed from any random document (document, not policy!), but >> we can't vote about such a big change which affects a lot of members? >> >> In my opinion this change should have been part of the charging scheme >> 2019 voting. > Seems like you're complaining about something to me. Or rather two things ^-^ > >> Also, the notice period (which included public holidays in many >> countries) was, in my opinion, ways too short. > If only there were some period for those that need it... to transition to yearly payments... Oh, right! A transition period of at least a year. Point me to the problem, thanks :-) > -- With respect, *Larisa Yurkina* RosNIIROS Internet Number Resources Group / Chief Manager l.yurkina(a)ripn.net <mailto:l.yurkina@ripn.net> / www.ripn.net <http://www.ripn.net> Т.: +7 495 737-0604 _______________________________________________ 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/terrence%40darkness-…

3 3

M&A procedure and transfers restrictions
by Aleksey Bulgakov 16 Jan '19

16 Jan '19

Hi. According to the sad document https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-709#transfer36 Internet number resources that are subject to transfer restrictions imposed by the RIPE Policy "RIPE Resource Transfer Policies <http://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/transfer-policies>", and that are transferred due to a change in a member's business structure, must either remain registered with the original LIR account or be registered with a new LIR account. The receiving party will be provided with RIPE NCC services for these Internet number resources via either the original LIR account or the new LIR account until the policy restrictions are lifted. We have the next situation: 1. There are 2 legal entities - A and B, their accounts were opened in Summer 2018. 2. The legal entity B joined to the legal entity A. 3. The NCC transformed the account of the entity B to the additional account of the entity A. While the NCC prepared the LIR Account Agreement and sent it by DHL we finalized the procedure in January 2019 only. 4. But the NCC also called it as transfer because of MERGER_OR_ACQUISITION. 5. So we have the transfer restriction period until January 2021 and the NCC can pay bonus (4200 EUR for 3 accounts) for it's executive board, stuffs etc. I thought, because of the account transformation the procedure cannot be called as transfer of resources. Otherwise the NCC should merge accounts without additional account creation if the transfer restrictions aren't applied because of M&A.

6 10

Question regarding Courses
by Marcel Blenkers 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Hello everyone, maybe someone in here is able to help me. We registered for a course in February in Hamburg, received the first mail stating "Please wait for the final confirmation", but since then, nothing happened. You are still able to register for the course in Hamburg in February, but we would love to start Room-Reservation and buy the tickets to get to hamburg, but unfortunatly there is no contact we could ask if we are able to attend this course. Maybe someone here might give me a hint what to do next? Thanks in Advance. Marcel Blenkers

2 2

billing problem on multiple lir accounts.
by Goriweb LLC 09 Jan '19

09 Jan '19

hi we have multiple accounts. one account is going to be closed by december 2018, and we are trying to transfer /22 to another account. ripe says, WE HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL ACCOUNTS FOR 2018 its huge mistake. for example: you have; uk.company 04-04-2016 uk.company1 05-05-2018 uk.company2 06-06-2018 uk.company3 07-07-2018 and you wanted to transfer /22 from uk.company to uk.company3 ripe wants payments for uk.company1 and uk.company2 as well. ticket ids: #138277, #137978 who will help me solve this problem? they allowed us to create multiple accounts to prevent manipulations on votes, then trying to charge more. they are replying tickets 1 day later.

17 19

Re: [members-discuss] Billing scheme
by Tobias Weinfeld 09 Jan '19

09 Jan '19

Dear colleagues, the removement of the ability of a quarterly or half-annually billing scheme is in my opinion a bad move. Unfortunately I have no data prior to 1998, but at least since this year it was already possible for LIRs to choose from a quarterly, half-annually or annually charging scheme. It simplified and still simplifies the process for newcomers to become LIR. Altough the fees were higher than today we break here with a tradition that lasted more than 20 years (!). This change will decrease the amount of reminders, yes, but it also will decrease the amount of newcomers, small companies or even technical interested natural persons which plan to become LIR at RIPE. Furthermore the last subnets of the IPv4 pool, which is already quite scarce, won't go anymore to many newcomers, it will possibly go more to companies which already have enough means to buy IPv4 from the market. Those who have more financial opportunities can easily create multiple LIR accounts because they anyway pay annually as usual, so those who are affected are newcomers and small companies. I am strict against this change. It was an important simplification and I see no real reason for removing it after more than 20 years because in a few years when the pool is exhausted also the aforementioned heavy burden will be extenuated. Especially when it comes to IPv6 the next years it should be easily possible for newcomers to become LIR; because it is and should be a membership and not an investment. I also want to criticize that this was announced on a Friday, three days before Christmas, only about one month (now two months) the invoices for Q1/Y2019 will be sent and after expiration of the termination deadline of 15th December 2018. In my opinion, RIPE NCC is one of the fairest and liberal RIR - but that change isn't fair, it is more than astonishing.

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] billing problem on multiple lir accounts.
by Azer Karyagdy 08 Jan '19

08 Jan '19

Hello, Please note that depend from country it should be yearly payment + local taxes. For Russia it is now 20% VAT. And this VAT, depend from way of how business was registered in tax ministry may not to be returned. This might crash new small business or at least make their expenses to be unacceptable. With last terms about aquistion and join businesses it is also make hard way to get our from business. This may increase percent of died RIPE LIR's because beginners could not transfer their ip's could not sell it to another company or join with someone who can support their customers within 2 (or even 3 years). So RIPE will need sent invoices to collectors or get back ip's from such LIR's without any payments. RIPE can say why beginners do not use good business plan but remember that many new business die within first few years. Best Regards Azer ----- Исходное сообщение ----- > * Alexander Buzaev <buzaev.weecomi(a)ukr.net> [2019-01-08 08:22]: > > Dear Sebastian, > > I am not happy with this decision. This is too large a one-time > > fee. Especially for our country. > > Hi Alexander, > > that might be, but you're not "many members". As for a too large > one-time fee, the paragraph adressed this: > > The Executive Board supported the implementation of an enhanced > billing cycle and instructs the RIPE NCC Management to implement a > yearly billing process, including payment options for members with > cash flow limitations. > > You should ask the RIPE NCC what the available payment options are in > your case. > > Regards > > Sebastian > > _______________________________________________ > 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/azer%40karyagdy.com >

2 2

M&A procedure
by IPLab 19 Dec '18

19 Dec '18

6 6

Policy violation
by Marco Schmidt 18 Dec '18

18 Dec '18

Dear Aleksey and all, We would like to clarify the situation because the policy refers to transfers between RIPE NCC members and not transfers between the LIR accounts that members might hold. A member may hold multiple LIR accounts. Regarding the section that you refer to in the procedure, please see the mail that was sent to the NCC Announce mailing list in October: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/2018-October/001286.ht… This message explains how the RIPE NCC processes transfers of IPv4 address space or 16-bit ASNs due to a merger, acquisition or any other change in business structure. We hope this clarifies that no policy violation has taken place. A merger or acquisition is possible at any time and must take place following the processes outlined in the email. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC

2 1

Change of conditions
by Aleksey Bulgakov 17 Dec '18

17 Dec '18

Dear all. I would like to ask you one question. If one company open account in June 2018, but respected executive board decides to implement restrictions in September - should the company to apply this restrictions? I mean the document https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-709#transfer35 -- ---------- Best regards, Alexey Bulgakov

9 9

Re: [members-discuss] [exec-board] Change of conditions
by Rob Golding 17 Dec '18

17 Dec '18

> Curious about the statement that Companies House don't maintain records > of M&A activity. Surely they maintain a record of the controlling interest for > all UK companies They do, however whilst for most companies that's "correct" at least once a year (we hope), in the majority of M&As there are no changes at companies house as the original "org" is no longer required/wanted - Directors/owners/shareholders details do get updated where they want to continue that "brand" but that's sub-10% of company acquisitions, the bulk of M&A activity in the LTD space (rather than PLC space) is "asset" rather than "share" based [with about 1/3rd being where the liquidators sell off the assets , or goodwill/brand or whatever] So the statement is correct in general terms, that nothing appears at companies house As to whether you can "infer" it (as some of us do when regular buyers take over companies we're following) ... > If it is on record that A is now a PSC with >50% voting/equity of B then an > acquisition has taken place No it means A has 50% of the equity, that’s very different to an acquisition, although can be indicative of takeover - the ability to vote on a resolution and the running of a company are very different things > and if B and C notify their PSCs are the same then > a merger between B & C has taken place. It means nothing of the sort. Being listed as the same PSC on multiple companies absolutely does not mean in any way they have merged. IP Cortex own corporate structure being a good example of why this doesn’t mean what you're saying - 2 separate legal entities despite same PSCs/Shareholders - not Merged, not Acquired, just "similarly owned" > My understanding is that for many things RIPE want a (virtual) piece of paper > that certifies X is true, rather than a process for verifying in a public database > that X is true I think the idea of formalising what can be used where public-database doesn't contain the data is good overall, but exactly how you do that I am not sure - I can see lots of ways to not do it effectively though :) Rob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

2 1

Re.: Policy violation
by FreeData 14 Dec '18

14 Dec '18

1 0

Policy violation
by Николай Давыденко 14 Dec '18

14 Dec '18

1 0

Policy violation
by FreeData 14 Dec '18

14 Dec '18

1 0

Policy violation
by FreeData 14 Dec '18

14 Dec '18

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] billing problem on multiple lir accounts.
by ripe-member-discuss+lr＠c2play.de 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Our AS is in a macro that we don't authorize.
by Erik Bais 10 Dec '18

10 Dec '18

I have to agree with Karl. I also have some AS-SETS in the RIPEDB that we use for RPSL stuff that we feed into a routeserver of an IXP for instance.. with whom we don't want to peer with .. it works as an exclude list. The list isn't used for providing transit or telling others that they can find them in our AS cone ... so doing authorisations on them or other stuff would break things in our case.. Depending of the usage, it will give a different result. Regards, Erik Bais On 05/11/2018, 07:49, "members-discuss on behalf of Kaiser, Karl" <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net on behalf of karl.kaiser(a)upc.at> wrote: Hi, I do understand your concerns, but: also your AS number shows up in someone elses AS-SET is does not mean any traffic being routed anywhere. This is mainly a documentational and a possible security issue (also no harm seems to be done by now). AS24748 seem to have 106 Peers - far away from the "thousands". The macro: AS24748:AS-THINX contains about every single active AS-Number i know of (at least the first 10 of 15 that came into my mind were in there). So there guy's built a fancy and completely useless macro - maybe they shouldn't consider their upstream to be their customers. Anyhow - forget about them or try to make them clean up their mess - but I don't think this mailinglist might be able to help you any further. Kind regards Karl ________________________________________ Von: members-discuss [members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net]" im Auftrag von "José Manuel Giner [jm(a)ginernet.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 02. November 2018 10:27 An: members-discuss(a)ripe.net Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] Our AS is in a macro that we don't authorize. I want my traffic routed where I want it. I'm not a member of that IX and if you're routing traffic through this IX, it's being a latency problem (my servers are a far away from that IX, +60 ms) and possibly a hijaking security problem. On 01/11/2018 10:13, Tapio Haapala wrote: > Why you want remove your AS from IX routing list? You want that your > prefixes does not get routed to some part of internet? Correct if I am > wrong but for me that looks more like that at least someone (atman) do > filtering even for tier1 operators and at least in theory it should be > good thing. > > > On 30.10.2018 16:27, José Manuel Giner wrote: >> Hi, we checked that our AS is present in the macro: AS24748:AS-THINX >> (they have thousands of AS in their macro) >> >> After contacting atman.pl who is responsible for this macro, they tell me: >> >>> It appears that AS59432 is contained in one of our customers AS-SETs and >>> it is automatically added to our AS-SET AS24748:AS-THINX >>> >>> As soon as they remove AS59432, it will disappear from AS24748:AS-THINX >> >> We have asked him how we can find out who that customer is. But their >> answer doesn't give us any information. >> >>> Please be kindly informed that our macros are being built automatically >>> according to our customers` macros. If your AS happens to be removed >>> from whichever of our customer`s macros, ours is to be changed >> accordingly. >> >> We are concerned about this situation and do not know how to proceed. >> >> Thank you for your help! >> > > -- José Manuel Giner http://ginernet.com _______________________________________________ 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/karl.kaiser%40upc.at Information gemäß § 14 Unternehmensgesetzbuch: T-Mobile Austria GmbH, Firmensitz: Wien, Geschäftsanschrift Rennweg 97-99, 1030 Wien, Firmenbuchnummer: FN 171112 k, Handelsgericht Wien. _______________________________________________ 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/erik%40bais.name

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] LIR???s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support
by Bunea TELECOM 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

Can you please show me a successful implementation of NAT in a medium sized datacenter? I am quite curious. Also, how about companies that have a dormant /8 which they don’t even announce ? I think you should be angry over them, for having millions of IPv4 unused, and not over us, who have a few thousands. I think they are the ones you refer to as stealing the future of other companies, right ? — Petru Bunea / CEO suport(a)bunea.eu <mailto:suport@bunea.eu> / +40752481282 <tel:+40752481282> Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT http://www.bunea.eu <http://www.bunea.eu/> / +40745495495 <tel:+40745495495> > On 4 Dec 2018, at 15:50, Lutz Donnerhacke <L.Donnerhacke(a)iks-service.de> wrote: > > You can’t avoid NAT, because there are not enough IPv4’s for everybody. > You can’t change this, because the IPv4 pool is limited by technical standards. > So you either implement NAT or move to IPv6. The best advice is to do both. > > Faking LIRs for RIPE in order to grab legacy IP space is stealing the future of other companies. > > Von: Bunea TELECOM <suport(a)bunea.eu <mailto:suport@bunea.eu>> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2018 14:16 > An: Lutz Donnerhacke <L.Donnerhacke(a)iks-service.de <mailto:L.Donnerhacke@iks-service.de>> > Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> > Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] LIR???s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support > > Hello Lutz, > > Perhaps you should also offer some advice for us, we run a datacenter and we are very curious how we can evolve without having to open up multiple LIR accounts? > I don’t think NAT is a solution, so I am waiting for your answer. > > Thanks > — > > > <image001.jpg> > > > > > Petru Bunea / CEO > suport(a)bunea.eu <mailto:suport@bunea.eu> / +40752481282 <tel:+40752481282> > Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT > http://www.bunea.eu <http://www.bunea.eu/> / +40745495495 <tel:+40745495495> > > > On 4 Dec 2018, at 14:50, Lutz Donnerhacke <L.Donnerhacke(a)iks-service.de <mailto:L.Donnerhacke@iks-service.de>> wrote: > > Because I need more addresses to offer to my customers. Purchasing > addresses from open market is risky. Thats why I open new LIRs. > > You are doing it wrong. > > Please learn how to operate an ISP in modern times. > Two hints: > - https://lutz.donnerhacke.de/eng/content/search?SearchText=NAT <https://lutz.donnerhacke.de/eng/content/search?SearchText=NAT> (use deepl.com <http://deepl.com/>) > - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6540 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6540> > > But please stop wasting tight resources by incompetence. > And please stop stealing resources from others by tricking RIPE policies. > > Please note, that your message is enough to reclaim the illegal obtained resources back by RIPE NCC. That's one of the activities we pay them for. > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss(a)ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@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/suport%40bunea.eu <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/suport%40bunea.eu> >

3 2

Re: [members-discuss] LIR???s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support
by support 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Ist very good what you are writing there Lutz.The reality is another thing, especially about IPv6.We are using both well, but we are a company located in Kenya.Kenya dont use IPv6 which means that when we dont work with both (IPv4 and IPv6) our Sites will not be available worldwide, especially in Kenya. This dont mean right now that I support lower prices and lower transfer time.Who opens a LIR have to accept the rules, otherwise dont think even to open one!Have a nice day guys. Christian Lutzner Vhost Meremeta LTDVon meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet.

3 3

Two mailing lists?
by LeBar, Russell J 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Any chance we could split this list into two -- one for the business, billing, contracts, etc. side of things and another for technical side of things? -- Russ ________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may contain confidential and privileged information protected by law. If you received this e-mail in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies from your system.

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] LIR???s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support
by ivaylo 04 Dec '18

04 Dec '18

Hello, everybody The problems with overing IPV4 space will become more and more actual with time, and I think this come from unfair RIPE charging scheme. As far as I'am familiar Current charging allows some lirs to have huge number of unused resources and others to think how to get needed resources, and everybody pay same amount of money. Also this scheme create space for speculators to get easy money from internet companies. By me fair will be this scheme: Registration fee: no matter as RIPE decide 2k euro seems not little, but it is acceptable. Annual fee: 350 euro (or second variant 1400 euro as it is now) Every LIR (old and new) get one /24 IPV4 and one ASN for these 350 EURO (or one /22 IPV4 and 1 ASN) same as it is now, just for smaller organizations/companies which want to become LIR small fees and less resources will be provided. If a company or organization needs more IPV4 space the annual fee to be bigger, for every /24 +350 euro. If a company have more than one /19 fee to be +400 euro for every /24 after first /19 All LIR to LIR permanent resource transfer to be disabled. So if you need resources only ripe can provide them to you. I beliave this way LIRs who have a lot of blocked unused IPV4 resources will return them to RIPE and they will be available for those who need them. Also speculators will be eliminated. And not last, RIPE will collect more moneys and will do what it have to do - to control the resources. Maybe somewhere back in time something similar was discussed but can somebody explain me why it is not accepted or rejected or not liked ? Ivaylo Josifov Varteh LTD Varna, Bulgaria On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, ripe-member-discuss+lr(a)c2play.de wrote: > @Dmitry: > RIPE NCC does not earn quick money, it is a non-profit organisation and not > a self-service shop. > > @Lutz Donnerhacke: > I'm not sure what you mean, but it is allowed for a single company to create > multiple LIR accounts and so get multiple IPv4 /22 at the end of the day. > That is absolutely conform to RIPE policy. > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > From: Dmitry Vorozhtsov <dvorozhtsov(a)gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, 4. Dec 2018 ? 12:09 CET +0100 > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] LIR???s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need > support > > You are wrong. All my addresses are assigned and working. You may ask - why > do I open LIRs again and again? > > Because I need more addresses to offer to my customers. Purchasing addresses > from open market is risky. Thats why I open new LIRs. > > RIPE earns quick money in this case, not me. > > > Regards, Dmitry. > > 04.12.2018 19:41, Paolo Prandini ?????: > > I was worried so much about this discussion starting again! > > I suppose a lot of people is interested in it, as far as I can > understand > is a > > matter of quick money by buying and reselling the last IPv4 blocks, > and > RIPE is > > NOT making this easy enough for some people. Then there are legitimate > > claims, but the rules were so easy to understand, 1k IPs for new LIRs, > > that there is always someone trying to bend them to make some more money. > > Anyway it is the way it goes, the world moves where it finds the money, > > I suppose it is a corollary of finding the minimum of potential energy. > > But I am not interested in this discussion, it goes on and on and on > > since more than a year, I am unsubscribing to the list. Thanks anybody > > who contributed. > > Paolo > > > > Il 04/12/2018 11:25, ripe-member-discuss+lr(a)c2play.de ha scritto: > >> > Sebastian Wiesinger sebastian.wiesinger at noris.net [Tue Dec 4 >> > 08:53:56 CET 2018] > >> > The RIPE NCC fees are anually. As a convenience *to you* you can also > >> > pay them quarterly (we don't). This has been discussed multiple times. > >> > >> > Regards > >> > >> > Sebastian > >> > >> That is, in the light of the matter of this discussion, not quite >> > correct. Yes, the fees are annual - but they are charged on a pro >> rata > basis, so for example, LIRs don't pay a full annual fee of >> ?1,400 when > they become LIR in the last quarter of 2018. They only >> pay for the last > quarter of 2018. > >> > >> What the starter of the discussion criticizes is that LIRs not only >> > have to pay member fees retroactively, they also have to pay it when >> those > LIRs are not involved in the transfer at all. > >> > >> To be honest, I think that RIPE NCC is a very fair RIR, if not the >> > fairest. But I also admit that this rule is quite confusing: To >> prevent > impatient people from creating a LIR in the last quarter of a >> year, then > transfering the resource(s) and closing the LIR to make >> fast money, we > already have a rule which states that scarce resources >> cannot be > transfered within the first 24 months after the resource >> was allocated. > >> > >> There may be also other reasons for companies to create multiple LIRs >> > than making fast money. Many people do legitime business. Also in the >> > earlier days of RIPE NCC some companies had multiple LIRs. > >> > >> With that said, I don't think the way how fees are charged for such >> > transfers is consistent, it is quite confusing. On the other hand >> RIPE NCC > has a legitime interest to prevent people from making fast >> money; but here > we already have an effective rule: The 24 months >> restriction. > >> > >> So the question is: What is the reason for this rule if you think we >> > need it to be kept? > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- >> > >> *From:*Dave Benwell <dave(a)it-communicationsltd.co.uk >> > </email/new/1/dave%40it-communicationsltd.co.uk>> > >> *Sent:*Tuesday, 4. Dec 2018 ? 10:39 CET +0100 > >> *To:*Sebastian Wiesinger <sebastian.wiesinger(a)noris.net >> > </email/new/1/sebastian.wiesinger%40noris.net>> > >> members-discuss(a)ripe.net </email/new/1/members-discuss%40ripe.net> > >> > >> *Subject:*Re: [members-discuss] LIR?s billing issues with RIPE NCC, >> > need support > >> > >> Additional accounts are normally setup to get more IP Space > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On >> > Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger > >> Sent: 04 December 2018 07:54 > >> To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > >> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] LIR?s billing issues with RIPE NCC, >> need > support > >> > >> * Juri <hostmaster(a)ntx.ru> [2018-12-04 08:09]: > >> > I suggest RIPE NCC do correct accounting for each LIR for the time >> > > this LIR instance exists. If LIR has annual billing - then RIPE NCC >> > > should use it. If LIR selected quarterly billing - RIPE NCC show >> use. > > But RIPE NCC should not overcharge LIRs for the time they >> didn't give > > any services for LIR instance. > >> > >> The RIPE NCC fees are anually. As a convenience *to you* you can also >> > pay them quarterly (we don't). This has been discussed multiple times. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Sebastian > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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/dave%40it-communic > ationsltd.co.uk > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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/ripe-member-discus > s%2Blr%40c2play.de > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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/prandini%40spe.net > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/dvorozhtsov%40gmail > .com > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ripe-mem > ber-discuss%2Blr%40c2play.de >

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] LIR’s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support
by ripe-member-discuss+lr＠c2play.de 04 Dec '18

04 Dec '18

6 5

Re: [members-discuss] LIR???s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support
by ripe-member-discuss+lr＠c2play.de 04 Dec '18

04 Dec '18

2 1