- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

[#14514]: Discussion : Cost allocation
by lir.nic 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

1 0

[#34560]: Discussion : Cost allocation
by lir.nic 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

1 0

[#34560]: Discussion : Cost allocation
by hostmaster＠lumison.net 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

1 0

[#14514]: Discussion : Cost allocation
by hostmaster＠lumison.net 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

1 0

[#14514]: Discussion : Cost allocation
by Erik Bais 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

1 0

[#34560]: Discussion : Cost allocation
by Erik Bais 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

1 0

New Charging Scheme: Update from the RIPE NCC
by Axel Pawlik 25 Aug '11

25 Aug '11

Dear all, Three weeks ago we have asked you for feedback on our ideas for a renewed Charging Scheme for 20112. In the intervening time, you have discussed the matter, and even conducting a mini-survey. Thank you very much for this input; the RIPE NCC Executive Board and staff have followed the discussion closely. We have noticed a fair number of remarks about our choice to base the Charging Scheme on the amount of number resources our members hold, some arguing that IPv4 is about to fade into irrelevance for these purposes. I would like to explain our reasoning a little more... As you know, the RIPE NCC performs quite a number of activities, on a neutral platform, for the benefit of all of our members and the "good of the Internet" at large. IP address allocation is indeed a large part of it; however, activities such as running the RIPE Database, operations of the k-root server clusters, DNSMON, development of measuring tools and similar are examples of "supporting the Internet infrastructure through technical coordination". The current, and long-established Charging Scheme is based on allocations of addresses over time. As IPv4 allocations will indeed be less prominent in the not-too-distant future, we need to ensure that the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme is adapted in a way that ensures the stability of your favorite service organisation. Other requirements are, as we understood from surveys and personal feedback, simplicity, predictability and fairness. We thought long and hard about it, looking for an indication, a yardstick, to measure the benefit that our members derive from our services. Of course there are many options: company turnover, staff numbers, profit and more. Being active in our particular industry, we agreed that the depth to which our members are involved in the "operations of the Internet" is closely related to the benefit they get from our overall service portfolio. How then do you measure "involvement in the operations of the Internet?" This is where we decided to "keep it close to home," assuming that an organisation holding a /8 is likely to be more involved than those holding a /20 or less. And following from this we decided to use address holdings as the yardstick, one benefit being that we all understand this very well. The rest, as they say, is history... We thought it would be good to change as little as possible from the old Charging Scheme principles, carrying over the idea of membership classes. >From the discussions of the last couple of weeks, one opinion that came across quite strongly is the wish to see smaller jumps in between fee categories. Taking that cue, we are now preparing alternatives, to be presented to the Executive Board in September, that are looking at both a larger number of classes, as well as a sliding scale alternative. We'll keep you posted. For now, thank you again for letting us know what you think. Kind regards, Axel Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme - Survey - RESULTS
by Christian 'wiwi' Wittenhorst 23 Aug '11

23 Aug '11

Dear members-discuss, please find attached the results of the poll. Highlights: - almost 75% would like a scheme without steep jumps between the categories. - about 60% would give away secondary resources (ASN, IP space for IXP, ...) for free. - 60% (vs. 27%) would support a scheme, that encourages LIRs to return unused IPv4 space. - almost 50% would consider a price of EUR 0.02/(IP*year) as reasonable. - 50% do NOT want per transaction fee. - wide, commercial IPv6 deployment is expected for 2014 or later - 65% think, that PI space should be owned or sponsored by a LIR, only. 50% are willing to support a special, low pricing for these (very) small LIRs. Best regards, Christian

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme - Survey - REMINDER
by Christian 'wiwi' Wittenhorst 14 Aug '11

14 Aug '11

Dear members-discuss, if you haven't cast your vote, yet, please do now ;-) https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FGKJBQJ 2**7-1 votes so far... ;-) Best regards, Christian

1 0

RE: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 10 Aug '11

10 Aug '11

don't get me wrong, they're perfectly free to run whatever the fuck they want over -their- networks, and sell it to their customers, just that they should not complain if all of a sudden, facebook, google, porn, and the piratebay etc are no longer on their part of the internet *grin* -- Greetings, Sven Olaf Kamphuis, CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG ========================================================================= Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net ========================================================================= <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob ========================================================================= Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Redi Tela wrote: > The problem is, big players have lots of IPv4 addresses so they don't care > about switching to dual-stack or IPv6. Small LIRs have small networks but > nobody cares about their opinion:) > > Probably charging more $$ to big players will push them to release > not-in-use IPv4 or switch to IPv6 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] > On Behalf Of Sven Olaf Kamphuis > Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:14 PM > To: Redi Tela > Cc: 'Brandon Butterworth'; jblessing(a)llnw.com; members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme > > there comes a time where you have to ask: are you running a business, or a > museum :P keeping ipv4 around just for old times sake... oh well.. > > -- > Greetings, > > Sven Olaf Kamphuis, > CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG > ========================================================================= > Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 > D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B > BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 > Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 > RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net > ========================================================================= > <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle > http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob > ========================================================================= > > Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this > email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged > and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or > individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. > > > On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> Yes, sure, ipv4 will be around for quite a few decades to come, in older >> packet radio networks, military tactical internet, configuration vlans of >> older equipment, etc, but it has no future on the internet. >> >> those "few well known sites" is all it takes, really. >> >> eyeballs -> few well known sites >> >> and the rest is pretty much -irrelevant-, and simply will have to follow, > or >> die. >> >> and yes, we have run dual stack for the past few years (triple stack if > you >> consider that we also run X.25 for emergency networks should the internet >> ever fail due to military intervention or crisis situations ;) >> >> we'd very much like to see the intarrwebz ditch ipv4 however, it has no >> future, there is no need to develop for it (neither software, nor billing >> models ;), get over it. >> >> >> >> -- >> Greetings, >> >> Sven Olaf Kamphuis, >> CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG >> ========================================================================= >> Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 >> D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B >> BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 >> Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 >> RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net >> ========================================================================= >> <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle >> http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob >> ========================================================================= >> >> Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this >> email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged >> and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or >> individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or >> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. >> >> >> On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Redi Tela wrote: >> >>> Have you guys tried IPV6 ? IPv4 is not dead at all, it will be here for >>> years. There are only about 6K prefixes and you can only browse just a > few >>> 'well-known' sites. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net >>> [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] >>> On Behalf Of Brandon Butterworth >>> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:22 PM >>> To: jblessing(a)llnw.com; sven(a)cb3rob.net >>> Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net >>> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme >>> >>>> regarding the ipv4 address space, we've actually tried to announce some >>>> e-class space over the past days, appearantly, most, if not all, routers >>>> filter it. >>> >>> Interesting, but doesn't matter, v4 is dead, get over it (as you >>> eloquently explained previously) >>> >>>> furthermore, we've found a bunch of legacy ranges, which are not >>>> announced at all, so if the DoD and IBM would be kind enough to hand >>>> them over to ARIN/IANA, that would be appreciated >>> >>> No, that'd just give people an excuse to put off v6 for even longer. >>> >>> v6 or die. >>> >>>> don't see why "the prudential insurance company of america" would need > an >>>> /8, clearly they don't see the point of it themselves either, as they >>>> don't announce a single ip out of it :P >>> >>> You're not allocating it to them so it doesn't matter what point >>> you see. >>> >>> Back when it may have been of use I agreed, space allocated for non >>> internet use could have been considered a different non overlapping >>> realm and the entire space used on the internet regardless of any >>> private allocations for non internet use. However that wasn't how it >>> was chosen to be done and again it no longer matters as it's history >>> now. >>> >>> brandon >>> >>> ---- >>> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >>> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the >>> general >>> page: >>> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view >>> >>> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From >>> here, >>> you can add or remove addresses. >>> >> >> ---- >> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the > general >> page: >> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view >> >> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From > here, >> you can add or remove addresses. >> > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general > page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, > you can add or remove addresses. >

10 12

New Charging Scheme
by Marcel Edler (Optimate-Server.de) 09 Aug '11

09 Aug '11

Hello member, my LIR has 2x/18, 1x/19, 1x/17 PA-Allocation. When I look right my membership category will be size L. I have to pay 5000 Euro a year, because I have one /19 over /16. I think the price step from category M to category L is to big. 2500Eur -> 5000Eur You should add a category between M and L. It should have this requirements: IPv4: >/16, <=/14 price should be 3500 Euro every year Its not fair, that I have to pay 5000 Euro, instead 2500 Euro, only I have one /19 to much to met requirements for category M! -- Regards, Marcel Edler

34 61

Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by Jamie Stallwood 09 Aug '11

09 Aug '11

As a small LIR with a single /21 block ("effectively PI"), I'd hate to see any LIR small or big be priced out through punitive charging schemes. I can't see that being good either for the NCC or the RIPE community as a whole, if we weaken the membership base. I think the "wiwi" model, or something similar, has merit. Kind regards Jamie Stallwood -- Jamie Stallwood Security Specialist Imerja Ltd M: 07795 840385 jamie.stallwood(a)imerja.com NIC: uk.imerja.JS7259-RIPE -- Imerja Limited Tel: 0870 8611488 | Fax: 0870 8611489 | 24x7 ISOC: 0870 8611490 | Web: www.imerja.com Registered Office: Paragon House, Paragon Business Park, Chorley New Road, Horwich, Bolton BL6 6HG Registered in England and Wales No. 5180119 VAT Registered No. 845 0647 22 ISO Registered Firm No. GB2001527 This email is confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to which it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s) you should not use, copy, distribute or take any action or reliance on it, since to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately by email reply and delete it from your system. E-mail messages are not secure and attachments could contain software viruses which may damage your system. Whilst every reasonable precaution has been taken to minimise this risk, Imerja Limited cannot accept any liability for any damage sustained as a result of these factors. You are advised to carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not represent those of Imerja Limited unless otherwise stated.

1 0

Re: [#CRF-897-39192]: Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 08 Aug '11

08 Aug '11

actually, i think you're not doing very well at all, in fact, your techical skills seem to suck, considering that the ripe members ***MAILINGLIST*** has a fuckton of open tickets with your tracking system. so i suggest you remove the ticket system and auto-reply from any mailinglist you're on, including this one. -- Greetings, Sven Olaf Kamphuis, CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG ========================================================================= Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net ========================================================================= <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob ========================================================================= Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, allserverhosting wrote: > Brandon Butterworth, > > This email concerns your recent ticket: Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme (CRF-897-39192) > > As part of our commitment to improving your customer support experience, we would like to know how you think we are doing. > > You are invited to complete a short satisfaction survey consisting of just a few multiple-choice questions. > > It should take you no more than a minute to complete (we promise!). > > To take the survey, please click on the following link: http://helpdesk.allserverhosting.com/index.php?/Tickets/Survey/Index/CRF-89… > > Your feedback is very important to us and we really appreciate your time. > > Thank you in advance, > > allserverhosting > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Support Center: http://helpdesk.allserverhosting.com/index.php?

2 1

RE: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 06 Aug '11

06 Aug '11

big players that don't adapt go the way of the dinosaur. thats how things work. On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Redi Tela wrote: > The problem is, big players have lots of IPv4 addresses so they don't care > about switching to dual-stack or IPv6. Small LIRs have small networks but > nobody cares about their opinion:) > > Probably charging more $$ to big players will push them to release > not-in-use IPv4 or switch to IPv6 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] > On Behalf Of Sven Olaf Kamphuis > Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:14 PM > To: Redi Tela > Cc: 'Brandon Butterworth'; jblessing(a)llnw.com; members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme > > there comes a time where you have to ask: are you running a business, or a > museum :P keeping ipv4 around just for old times sake... oh well.. > > -- > Greetings, > > Sven Olaf Kamphuis, > CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG > ========================================================================= > Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 > D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B > BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 > Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 > RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net > ========================================================================= > <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle > http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob > ========================================================================= > > Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this > email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged > and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or > individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. > > > On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> Yes, sure, ipv4 will be around for quite a few decades to come, in older >> packet radio networks, military tactical internet, configuration vlans of >> older equipment, etc, but it has no future on the internet. >> >> those "few well known sites" is all it takes, really. >> >> eyeballs -> few well known sites >> >> and the rest is pretty much -irrelevant-, and simply will have to follow, > or >> die. >> >> and yes, we have run dual stack for the past few years (triple stack if > you >> consider that we also run X.25 for emergency networks should the internet >> ever fail due to military intervention or crisis situations ;) >> >> we'd very much like to see the intarrwebz ditch ipv4 however, it has no >> future, there is no need to develop for it (neither software, nor billing >> models ;), get over it. >> >> >> >> -- >> Greetings, >> >> Sven Olaf Kamphuis, >> CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG >> ========================================================================= >> Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 >> D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B >> BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 >> Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 >> RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net >> ========================================================================= >> <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle >> http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob >> ========================================================================= >> >> Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this >> email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged >> and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or >> individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or >> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. >> >> >> On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Redi Tela wrote: >> >>> Have you guys tried IPV6 ? IPv4 is not dead at all, it will be here for >>> years. There are only about 6K prefixes and you can only browse just a > few >>> 'well-known' sites. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net >>> [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] >>> On Behalf Of Brandon Butterworth >>> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:22 PM >>> To: jblessing(a)llnw.com; sven(a)cb3rob.net >>> Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net >>> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme >>> >>>> regarding the ipv4 address space, we've actually tried to announce some >>>> e-class space over the past days, appearantly, most, if not all, routers >>>> filter it. >>> >>> Interesting, but doesn't matter, v4 is dead, get over it (as you >>> eloquently explained previously) >>> >>>> furthermore, we've found a bunch of legacy ranges, which are not >>>> announced at all, so if the DoD and IBM would be kind enough to hand >>>> them over to ARIN/IANA, that would be appreciated >>> >>> No, that'd just give people an excuse to put off v6 for even longer. >>> >>> v6 or die. >>> >>>> don't see why "the prudential insurance company of america" would need > an >>>> /8, clearly they don't see the point of it themselves either, as they >>>> don't announce a single ip out of it :P >>> >>> You're not allocating it to them so it doesn't matter what point >>> you see. >>> >>> Back when it may have been of use I agreed, space allocated for non >>> internet use could have been considered a different non overlapping >>> realm and the entire space used on the internet regardless of any >>> private allocations for non internet use. However that wasn't how it >>> was chosen to be done and again it no longer matters as it's history >>> now. >>> >>> brandon >>> >>> ---- >>> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >>> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the >>> general >>> page: >>> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view >>> >>> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From >>> here, >>> you can add or remove addresses. >>> >> >> ---- >> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the > general >> page: >> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view >> >> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From > here, >> you can add or remove addresses. >> > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general > page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, > you can add or remove addresses. >

1 0

RE: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 06 Aug '11

06 Aug '11

Yes, sure, ipv4 will be around for quite a few decades to come, in older packet radio networks, military tactical internet, configuration vlans of older equipment, etc, but it has no future on the internet. those "few well known sites" is all it takes, really. eyeballs -> few well known sites and the rest is pretty much -irrelevant-, and simply will have to follow, or die. and yes, we have run dual stack for the past few years (triple stack if you consider that we also run X.25 for emergency networks should the internet ever fail due to military intervention or crisis situations ;) we'd very much like to see the intarrwebz ditch ipv4 however, it has no future, there is no need to develop for it (neither software, nor billing models ;), get over it. -- Greetings, Sven Olaf Kamphuis, CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG ========================================================================= Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209 D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479 Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799 RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: sven(a)cb3rob.net ========================================================================= <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle http://www.facebook.com/cb3rob ========================================================================= Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Redi Tela wrote: > Have you guys tried IPV6 ? IPv4 is not dead at all, it will be here for > years. There are only about 6K prefixes and you can only browse just a few > 'well-known' sites. > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] > On Behalf Of Brandon Butterworth > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:22 PM > To: jblessing(a)llnw.com; sven(a)cb3rob.net > Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme > >> regarding the ipv4 address space, we've actually tried to announce some >> e-class space over the past days, appearantly, most, if not all, routers >> filter it. > > Interesting, but doesn't matter, v4 is dead, get over it (as you > eloquently explained previously) > >> furthermore, we've found a bunch of legacy ranges, which are not >> announced at all, so if the DoD and IBM would be kind enough to hand >> them over to ARIN/IANA, that would be appreciated > > No, that'd just give people an excuse to put off v6 for even longer. > > v6 or die. > >> don't see why "the prudential insurance company of america" would need an >> /8, clearly they don't see the point of it themselves either, as they >> don't announce a single ip out of it :P > > You're not allocating it to them so it doesn't matter what point > you see. > > Back when it may have been of use I agreed, space allocated for non > internet use could have been considered a different non overlapping > realm and the entire space used on the internet regardless of any > private allocations for non internet use. However that wasn't how it > was chosen to be done and again it no longer matters as it's history > now. > > brandon > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general > page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, > you can add or remove addresses. >

1 1

Re: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
by Brandon Butterworth 05 Aug '11

05 Aug '11

> regarding the ipv4 address space, we've actually tried to announce some > e-class space over the past days, appearantly, most, if not all, routers > filter it. Interesting, but doesn't matter, v4 is dead, get over it (as you eloquently explained previously) > furthermore, we've found a bunch of legacy ranges, which are not > announced at all, so if the DoD and IBM would be kind enough to hand > them over to ARIN/IANA, that would be appreciated No, that'd just give people an excuse to put off v6 for even longer. v6 or die. > don't see why "the prudential insurance company of america" would need an > /8, clearly they don't see the point of it themselves either, as they > don't announce a single ip out of it :P You're not allocating it to them so it doesn't matter what point you see. Back when it may have been of use I agreed, space allocated for non internet use could have been considered a different non overlapping realm and the entire space used on the internet regardless of any private allocations for non internet use. However that wasn't how it was chosen to be done and again it no longer matters as it's history now. brandon

2 1

Proposal: Changes in charging scheme approval process
by Andrey Semenchuk 05 Aug '11

05 Aug '11

Hello, Current charging scheme approval process has a serious problem: the charging scheme will still be being under discussion after RIPE will calculate the billing score for LIRs. It means that LIRs can't plan their work in the new billing period because they doesn't know their payments I think we need change charging scheme approval process to avoid this situation in future: charging scheme approval process should be finished BEFORE RIPE calculate the billing score for LIRs. -- Best wishes, Andrey Semenchuk Trifle Internet Service Provider (056) 731-99-11 www.trifle.net

3 2

[ncc-announce] NRO NC Call for Nominations - RIPE NCC Service Region
by Axel Pawlik 04 Aug '11

04 Aug '11

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, There is a call for nominations from the RIPE NCC service region to fill one vacant seat on the Number Resource Organization (NRO) Number Council (NC). The term of Wilfried Woeber, who was appointed to the NRO NC by the RIPE NCC Executive Board in October 2008, ends on 31 December 2011. The RIPE NCC Executive Board will select one representative from the nominees to serve a three-year term on the NRO NCC beginning 1 January 2012. The decision of the Executive Board will be announced at the RIPE 63 Meeting, which will be held in Vienna from 31 October-4 November 2011. The deadline for nominations is 5 October 2011. Any individual residing within the RIPE NCC service region is eligible for nomination, except Regional Internet Registry (RIR) staff members. Self-nominations are permitted. There is no limit on the amount of terms someone can serve on the NRO NC. All nominees may submit a written statement in support of their nomination for publication on the RIPE NCC website. Other individuals may express support for nominated individuals that will be published on the RIPE NCC website. Details on how to make nominations or expressions of support are available at: http://www.ripe.net/nronc2011-process Expressions of support will also be published on the RIPE NCC website. To find out more about the NRO NC and the election process, please see: http://www.ripe.net/nronc2011 Regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC Important Dates: 5 October 2011: Deadline for NRO NC nominations 7 October 2011: Deadline for all confirmed nominations to be posted on the RIPE NCC website 31 October-4 November 2011: Result of selection announced at RIPE 63 Meeting in Vienna

1 0

Autoresponders and ticket systems
by Christopher Kunz 04 Aug '11

04 Aug '11

Hi, after taking part in the discussion, the following things happened: 1. I'm informed that Vicente Valero is out of the office. Twice. 2. I am the assignee of tickets #10982 and #10984 (probably 10985, after this message) in Private Layer Inc.'s ticket system. 3. I have issued two orders with Telekom's technical services. 4. I received two empty replies from <null(a)internet-fr.net>. 5. Anexia GmbH opened two tickets for me as well (663571, 148322). 6. Last, but not least, I now have access to the Solutios support center. To all colleagues involved in this, would you please: a) cancel tickets, accounts and whatever my postings triggered in your automatic systems. b) Remove my e-mail address from your databases immediately. c) Remove your auto-responding robots from this mailing list. At least make them honor "Precedence: bulk" headers. Thanks, Regards, and good night. --ck -- Filoo GmbH Christopher Kunz, Geschäftsführer Web: http://www.filoo.de/ E-Mail: chris(a)filoo.de Tel.: (+49) 0 52 48 / 1 89 84 -11 Fax: (+49) 0 52 48 / 1 89 84 -20 Please sign & encrypt mail wherever possible, my key: C882 8ED1 7DD1 9011 C088 EA50 5CFA 2EEB 397A CAC1 Moltkestraße 25a 33330 Gütersloh, Germany HRB4355, AG Gütersloh Geschäftsführer: S.Grewing, J.Rehpöhler, C.Kunz Folgen Sie uns auf Twitter: http://twitter.com/filoogmbh

1 0

Response to queries on Charging Scheme Models
by Jochem de Ruig 03 Aug '11

03 Aug '11

Dear colleagues, Many thanks for raising these issues. This feedback is valuable for the Executive Board and Senior Management in arriving at the Charging Scheme to be presented. In response to members' queries, the two Charging Scheme models aim to maintain, as they currently are, the sponsoring contracts between LIRs and End Users for PI assignments or ASNs. It may not have been fully clear, but the Direct Assignment Users (DAUs) mentioned in the Charging Scheme document only refers to the DAUs that have a direct contractual relationship with the RIPE NCC. This follows from RIPE Policy Proposal 2007-01. The XXS category in the charging schemes caters for these DAUs. Also, there is no intention to increase the RIPE NCC financial reserve. The service fees mentioned are based on: - The current expense forecast for 2012 - The current membership growth forecast - Running a break-even budget (not adding to the RIPE NCC financial reserve) Many members noted that the fees in both models are identical. To support the discussion, we will provide an indication of the fees in Model 2 based on current PI assignment information. This will be available tomorrow. Note that the fees shown in the models are indications. At this point in time, it is not possible to properly estimate the number of PI assignments there will be and how much revenue these PI assignments will generate. This is also due to the fact that Phase 3 of Policy Proposal 2007-01 is ongoing. Because the revenue for both models will be identical, the fees in Model 2 will be lower per category than those in Model 1. We will update the pages with the change matrix, give the expected number of members per category for the two Charging Scheme models and show indicated fees for Model 2. We will also add clarification regarding PI resource holders. This will be available shortly. Kind regards, Jochem de Ruig Chief Financial Officer RIPE NCC

4 4

idea Christian 'wiwi' Wittenhorst
by ZeXoTeK IT-Services | Jens Winter 03 Aug '11

03 Aug '11

Hello, yes the idea from Christian Wittenhorst is great. I think this is the best charging scheme for fairness over all members. By jens

3 2

[ncc-announce] New RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Models: Feedback Required
by Nigel Titley 03 Aug '11

03 Aug '11

Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC Executive Board will present a new Charging Scheme to the membership at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) to be held in Vienna on 2 November 2011. The Executive Board is working with the RIPE NCC Senior Management on various options that could be included in the Charging Scheme. It would like to solicit feedback from members on two Charging Scheme models before deciding on a final version to present at the GM. The two models are based on established RIPE NCC organisational principles. Both models, as well as an explanation of the models' features and differences, are presented at: https://www.ripe.net/lir-services/ncc/gm/november-2011/ripe-ncc-proposed-ne… The RIPE NCC Executive Board welcomes any feedback on the proposed models. You can provide your feedback by using the online form or by sending an email directly to agm(a)ripe.net. After considering the feedback from the membership on the proposed Charging Scheme models, the Executive Board will decide which model it will present to the membership at the GM. If you wish to discuss the proposed new Charging Scheme models with other RIPE NCC members, please start a discussion on the members-discuss(a)ripe.net mailing list. Information about this list can be found online at: https://www.ripe.net/lir-services/member-support/info/membership-mailing-li… We look forward to hearing your comments. Regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board Chairman

6 9

Re: [members-discuss] idea Christian 'wiwi' Wittenhorst
by Xavier BEAUDOUIN 03 Aug '11

03 Aug '11

+1 Association kazar "Marcel Edler (Optimate-Server.de)" <medler(a)optimate-server.de> a écrit : >Hello Christian 'wiwi' Wittenhorst, > >this idea sounds great and should be fair for all members: > /22 EUR 502 > /21 EUR 904 > /20 EUR 1308 > /19 EUR 1716 > /18 EUR 2132 > /17 EUR 2565 > /16 EUR 3031 > /15 EUR 3562 > /14 EUR 4224 > /13 EUR 5148 > /12 EUR 6597 > /11 EUR 9094 > /10 EUR 13688 > /9 EUR 22477 > /8 EUR 39654 > >In new charging scheme I have to pay 5000 Eur for 73.440IPs >(1x/16,1x/19) like an ISP with 1.024.000 IPs (/12)! >I pay 0,068 Euro for each IP. >The ISP with 1.024.000IPs pays only 0,00488 Euro for each IP. >I have to pay !!14!! times more than the other ISP! > >I prefer Christian's idea. > >Regards, >Marcel Edler >Geschäftsinhaber > >---- >If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss list, please log in to your LIR Portal account at: http://lirportal.ripe.net/ >First click on General and then click on Edit. >At the bottom of the page you can add or remove addresses.

1 0

New Charging Scheme
by ZeXoTeK IT-Services | Jens Winter 02 Aug '11

02 Aug '11

Hello, as Marcel wrote before, i also think the step between category M and L is to big. The Charging Scheme 2011 said: LARGE € 4,100 I think € 3,500 for catecory L should be ok, because it is between category M and L in the Charging Scheme of 2011. At this moment we have to calculate the Charging Scheme from IPv4 allocations, and IPv4 is running out. This mean, in future all LIR´s cannot get any IPv4 in big blocks so that they can use the free space in his category for growing. By Jens Winter X-NCC-RegID: de.zexotek

1 0

New RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Models
by Andrey Semenchuk 02 Aug '11

02 Aug '11

Hello, > All contracts for any RIPE NCC products or services will be between the RIPE NCC and a member Last few years it were additional contracts between LIRs and End Users. This thesis is not clear: will be the contracts between LIRs and End Users or they will be cancelled? > The RIPE NCC Executive Board will present a new Charging Scheme to the membership at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) to be held in Vienna on 2 November 2011. > > In Model 1, there is no charge for PI assignments > In Model 2, each additional PI assignment incurs a charge of EUR 100 per assignment. This charge is an increase from the current PI charge but better reflects the amount of work the RIPE NCC must do to administer and assign PI space. There's no explanation in the new charging scheme how PI assignments will be calculated, If calculations will be the same as fot charging scheme 2011, charging scheme will be applied to the number of assignments at 30th september 2011. So, since 30th september till 2th november 2011 LIRs will not have any idea about final charging scheme but should sign agreements with End Users. As for me, provided changes shoud be discussed for charging scheme 2013 or discussion of the new charging scheme should be made before 30th september 2011 -- Best wishes, Andrey Semenchuk Trifle Internet Service Provider (056) 731-99-11 www.trifle.net

1 0