- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Sander Steffann 16 Mar '23

16 Mar '23

Hi Simon Jan, > Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. I feel this model double-charges for PI and ASN. LIRs with many of those resources both pay €50 per resource, and also run the risk of being pushed up into a higher category. I strongly feel that PI and ASN should be excluded from the category score calculation. On a side note, I also feel that the RIPE NCC’s budget is getting a bit out of control. RIPE NCC is primarily an Internet Registry, and I would like to see focus concentrating on Registration Services, and less on anything else. I understand that the RIPE NCC is in a useful position to do nice research projects, represent the internet community etc. But looking at the budget it looks like the rest of the organisation is growing much faster than the registry function. I therefore also object to the €450 price increase in model 1. Cheers, Sander

11 13

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Matej 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

Hello all, I 100% agree with Elvis! Best regards, Matej Serc Sent via BlackBerry Hub+ Inbox for Android <http://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.blackberry.hub> From: elvis(a)v4escrow.net Sent: 14. marec 2023 19:30 To: sander(a)steffann.nl Cc: simon(a)ripe.net; members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Hi, the RIPE NCC budget has increased yearly for the past 10+ years. A non-for-profit registry that could operate with less than €20mil ten years ago needs more than twice the amount of money ten years later. Something has gone wrong if the organization spends twice as much money to offer similar services (sometimes of a poorer quality) to its members. Most of the members NEED to pay a membership fee to the RIPE NCC because they can not get the registration services anywhere else. The non-for-proffit organization called the RIPE NCC is a monopoly that now spends €40m a year. So, today members are forced by the NCC to choose from a bad charging scheme and an even worse one. They will pay more yearly regardless of whether they need more or less services from the NCC. I really believe a better accountability on what the NCC is planning to spend €40mil/year is needed before we vote on new charging schemes or price increases. FYI, I looked at the budget the NCC had over the past 10+ years, collected the number of FTEs and the CAPEX: 2012, ripe-544: 129 FTEs, 19,16 mEUR 2013, ripe-558: 135 FTEs, 18,5 mEUR 2014, ripe-598: 136 FTEs, 20,8 mEUR 2015, ripe-630: 136.1 FTEs, 20,66 mEUR 2016, ripe-662: 141 FTEs, 22,32 mEUR 2017, ripe-671: 148.5 FTEs, 25,11 mEUR 2018, ripe-693: 155.2 FTEs, 26,89 mEUR 2019, ripe-711: 165.1 FTEs, 31,60 mEUR 2020, ripe-735: 165.1 FTEs, 34,44 mEUR 2021, ripe-750: 170 FTEs, 33,56 mEUR 2022, ripe-773: 186 FTEs, 35,60 mEUR 2023, ripe-786: 190.6 FTEs, 40,00 mEUR Something happened in 2016-2017 that caused the NCC to increase the amount of money they need, dramatically. And since then, as no one seemed to make enough noise, the NCC and the Board kept increasing the budget until we got to this amount… €40mil. So, the budget doubled in 2023 when compared to 2015, I wonder why... At every RIPE Meeting there’s at least one person asking the NCC to find a way to spend less, and then the NCC and the Board ignore all that ‘noise’. Why a registry of IP addresses and AS Numbers needs to spend 40 million EUR per year is beyond my comprehension. Why the NCC needs 200 FTEs in 2023 when they were doing just fine (or even better) doing a similar job in 2013 with just 135 is also unknown. I’d suggest to the MD, the CFO and the Board to go back to the drawing board and figure out why the budget keeps going up. The services offered (those that 99% of the membership care for) are less and less (no one can get IPv4 anymore, they ask for an IPv6 allocation and an ASN and never come back to bother the NCC again… the price paid for membership should go down and not up. I understand and agree that staff’s salaries should be increased because of the galloping inflation. What I do not understand is why the budget increased from €20m to €40m in less than 10 years… there must have been other reasons too. I reject both charging scheme proposals. my 2 cents, Elvis On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 02:02 Sander Steffann <sander(a)steffann.nl <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> > wrote: Hi, > On a side note, I also feel that the RIPE NCC’s budget is getting a bit out of control. RIPE NCC is primarily an Internet Registry, and I would like to see focus concentrating on Registration Services, and less on anything else. I understand that the RIPE NCC is in a useful position to do nice research projects, represent the internet community etc. But looking at the budget it looks like the rest of the organisation is growing much faster than the registry function. I therefore also object to the €450 price increase in model 1. I had a chat with Hans Petter the other day, and he informed me that a significant part of the budget increase is caused by increasing staff salaries. Considering the recent inflation and economic circumstances I fully approve that. So if the fee increase is used to improve working conditions for RIPE NCC Staff, which are an important part of our community, I am perfectly fine with that! Cheers, Sander _______________________________________________ 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/elvis%40v4escrow.net -- This message was sent from a mobile device. Some typos may be possible.

1 0

RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Consultation
by paul.newton＠f4rn.org.uk 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

Dear RIPE, Thank you for the opportunity to input to the consultation. We would be strongly in favour of model 2 for the following reasons: We are a small, non-profit-making provider of fibre broadband to a rural community. We fill an essential gap, as communities like ours tend to get left behind in the rollout of FTTH by the major suppliers. We have only a small core team, so are not able to take advantage of the ancillary benefits that RIPE offers, such as training schemes and conferences. The cost of model 1 would represent about 3% of our turnover, which is a significant element in our cost scheme, and a barrier to attracting new subscribers. I hope you will give this due consideration: model 2. Kind regards, Dr Paul Newton F4RN

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Maria Merkel 13 Mar '23

13 Mar '23

Hi all, While I am responding to the parent message, I will also address some points raised in other replies. Our LIR primarily provides services to other group companies, but we also provide LIR services to some business and personal customers. My biggest concern is that if ASN assignments not only have their own fixed fee but also determine the membership fee tier, the cost of providing an ASN will become difficult to predict. This may be fine for internal and business customers as these can be charged a higher fee to compensate for this (perhaps by just assuming the worst case), but this may be more difficult for personal customers and we might be forced to discontinue this service for them entirely. If there is already a recurring per-ASN charge I do not see why the number of ASNs should also influence the membership fee tier. It is also unclear to me whether "Independent Internet number resource assignments" includes ASNs? I assume not as PI and ASN Category Scores are listed separately in Model 2, but it would be helpful if this could be clarified. I also do not understand why there is a separate sign-up fee and a "New membership Fee". Why are these not combined into a single sign-up fee? There is also some concern regarding the transfer fee. When something like a /22 is sold, a 1,000 € transfer fee obviously doesn't have too much of an impact, but this would be very different with a /24. It's unclear to me whether the transfer fee also applies to transfers of ASNs but if it does that also seems problematic for cases where ASNs are transferred free of charge between affiliated companies (and might actually encourage more ASNs being requested than are required). While I understand some of the concerns from others regarding the RIPE NCC's activities not being solely related to registry functions, I believe that this is justified and ultimately benefits its members. Maybe there should be a separate (cheaper) option to become an LIR without becoming a full member? — Maria Merkel [https://cdn.staclar.com/logos/novecore/newlogo.png] This email was sent from Staclar, Inc. Any statements contained in this email are personal to the author and are not necessarily the statements of the company unless specifically stated. Novecore and Staclar are collective trading names of Novecore Ltd., registered in England and Wales under company number 11748197, Novecore Licensing Ltd., registered in England and Wales under company number 11544982, Staclar Carrier Ltd., registered in England and Wales under company number 12219686, Staclar Financial Services Ltd., registered in England and Wales under company number 13843292 (registered offices 54 Portland Place, London, UK, W1B 1DY); Novecore Professional Services Ltd., registered in England and Wales under company number 13965912 (registered office 13 Freeland Park, Wareham Road, Poole, UK, BH16 6FA); Novecore (Estonia) OÜ, registered in Estonia under registry code 16543205 (local contact Baltic Business Services OÜ, Narva mnt 5, 10117 Tallinn, Estonia); Novecore (USA) Inc., registered in Delaware under file number 6707907, Novecore Licensing (USA) LLC, registered in Delaware under file number 4030866, and Staclar, Inc., registered in Delaware under file number 7413401 (registered agents The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange St, Wilmington DE 19801, USA). Novecore Licensing Ltd. is registered for VAT in the United Kingdom under VAT registration number 347 4545 80. Novecore (Estonia) OÜ is registered for VAT in the European Union under VAT registration number EE102518979. Staclar Financial Services Ltd. is an Annex 1 financial institution registered with and supervised by the Financial Conduct Authority under the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (firm reference number 989521). Registration is not equivalent to authorisation and is not an endorsement to do business with a firm. Staclar Financial Services Ltd. is not an authorised person within the meaning of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and does not review, approve, or endorse financial promotions for securities issues it is involved in or provide any form of investment advice. [Sent from Front] On March 7, 2023 at 10:43 AM GMT+1 simon(a)ripe.net<mailto:simon@ripe.net> wrote: Dear RIPE NCC members, We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023. In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers. The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership. One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members. To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as: Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model. You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/me… We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years. I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM. The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations I look forward to your input. Kind regards, Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC Summary 7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023 References Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-ch… Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentatio…<https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentatio…>

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Fabien SCHENKELS 13 Mar '23

13 Mar '23

Dear Members, We are exactly of the same opinion as "ServeByte" which says: « ServeByte Limited is in favor of the new proposed pricing model 2, to abolish the current membership fee model. We find that it is a much fairer pricing model for small service providers. All of our costs have increased over the past few years, but clawing higher fees from small LIR members is unsustainable. It discourages direct RIPE membership and instead encourages people to merge their resources, under a single LIR for little to no extra cost. We have even considered this. » We also want Model 2. It is about the survival of thousands of LIRs and the neutrality and independence of the Internet. Small members must be supported. Thank you for making the right choices and that the little LIRs can continue to live. Kind regards, Fabien Schenkels > Le 7 mars 2023 à 10:35, Simon Jan Haytink <simon(a)ripe.net> a écrit : > > Dear RIPE NCC members, > > We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023. > > In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers. > > The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership. > > One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members. > > To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as: > > Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. > > Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. > > In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model. > > You can download the Excel sheet from: > https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/me… > > We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years. > > I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss(a)ripe.net) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM. > > The consultation will also be recorded and available from: > https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations > > I look forward to your input. > > Kind regards, > > Simon Jan Haytink > Finance Director > RIPE NCC > > Summary > > 7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model > 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership > 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far > 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 > 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members > 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023 > > References > > Open House and Survey Results > https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-ch… > > Presentation at General Meeting > https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentatio… >

3 2

[ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme
by Simon-Jan Haytink 13 Mar '23

13 Mar '23

Dear all, Thank you for the discussion so far - we've seen a lot of great input and it really helps us to figure out what the members want to see (or not see) in their charging model. We hope to see more in the coming weeks. I'd like to clarify a couple of things that might address some concerns. First, the figures included in the calculator are by no means final. We include figures for a range of items because we want you to consider them, and we make the figures high enough to be worth consideration. The numbers attached to each item would likely result in more income than required, and it is unlikely we would charge on all criteria. Second, there has been no discussion on the Budget with the Executive Board yet. As was pointed out, the Budget discussions will happen in the run-up to the November General Meeting, and the draft Activity Plan and Budget will be shared with you well in advance. And we would welcome a similar level of discussion on that document. For the purposes of the charging scheme model discussion and the income we would need to derive, we are aiming for something roughly similar to the current budget. However, this may be different once we start the planning process for 2024 with your involvement. I also note that the mechanism to redistribute excess fees paid by members remains in place. In summary, what we are mainly looking for is input on the models so we can bring a good proposal to the Executive Board based on the input from the members. Your feedback is already helping us to develop that proposal. Understanding which model members want and which items we should or should not charge for is our main concern at the moment. Then we can then come up with a more developed proposal for members to consider. We will also have an Open House on this topic on 21 March at 14:00 CET (UTC+1). At that session, I'll be happy to dive into further details on the models and hope to get further input from the members. We will announce this shortly on our Announce list but you can already register at: https://www.ripe.net/s/charging-scheme-2024-open-house We are also collating the feedback and preparing answers that will address some of the comments we've seen. Also, a member pointed out an error in the calculator - cell L50 was calculating total PI rather than ASN assignments as expected. This has been fixed and the updated calculator is now available to download from the consultation page: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/ch… Best regards, Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC

3 2

New pricing proposal - it goes out of control
by Servperso 10 Mar '23

10 Mar '23

Hello Everyone, I'm analyzing the new charging scheme proposed by RIPE NCC. Adopt the new scheme like that KILL every small hosting provider include us. I don't think that's a good idea for RIPE NCC to kill a lot of small provider. It kill net neutrality, and i think a lot of small isp call IANA to sanction the RIPE board for that. In practice, you ask 8000€ / year because a provider has one ASN ? It's mostly mandatory for all members to own at least one. Why not doing some in between prupose: More "reasonable" base membership. Small ISP doesn't have to pay mush. Let imagine a resource quantity category. IPv6 only => category 1 < 10 000 IPv4 => category 2 50 000 IPv4 => .... ... - Extra fee for every PI of 50€ Like that, big isp who can pay for the RIPE work because they extract high value from them. Also people who sponsor a lot of PI (who generate a lot of work for RIPE resource analyst) pay for the employment time. As a reminder, ARIN use this model. Best regards, Sarah

10 10

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Sebastien Brossier 10 Mar '23

10 Mar '23

Hi all, Model 1 is no longer sustainable for very small orgs. Model 2 is better, as contribution would adjust to resource usage. Having cheaper categories encourages diversity, and more members guarantees a more stable income. Of course category 4 & 5 members will pay more than model 1, but this is just 0.50 EUR / IPv4 / year in the worst case. If you can't afford this, there is a serious problem with your business model. One big problem, though: Including independent resources in the category system will lead to LIRs stopping sponsorship of these resources. It also makes no sense, as these resources already have a separate charge. Category 0 membership should have a cost (like 100 EUR), because there is still an administrative cost. I see a 0 EUR membership as a vulnerability that could allow to take over the RIPE NCC. The transfer fee is too high for small IP amounts. Regardless of which charging scheme gets chosen, I also think it is time for RIPE NCC to wake up and severely reduce its expenses. The budget should adapt to what the members can contribute, not the other way around. Divide membership costs by 2 and both models will be seen more favourably. With kind regards, Sebastien Brossier

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by George Porter 10 Mar '23

10 Mar '23

Good morning, From our perspective as a fairly small LIR, who got in the IP address space in around 2002, and hold a /21 and two /22's which were cheap then, and do actually utilize most of our held address space, we feel we are some of the people that will be most affected by this. On our usage of the calculator, both model 1 and model 2 in our case will cost us the same amount next year. This is 2000 euros, which is an almost 60% increase from last year. Therefore whether model 1 or 2 goes ahead in this current iteration is meaningless to us. We do however believe that neither of these models are correct, and the figures for resources are far over inflated to what they should be. There are a couple of questions that we have: 1. In the initial post from Simon Jan Haytink, it was mentioned by RIPE that they expect that over the next year, organizations with lots of LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 will start to conglomerate those into less amounts of larger LIRs. This would decrease their income according to them. Please can someone from RIPE provide some justification into why they think this will happen, and what data supports that theory? From the RIPE NCC IPv4 pool, it looks to us that in 2021, RIPE built up a collection of IP addresses that had been handed back, and then towards the end of the year they handed those IP addresses out to members on the waiting list. It is our theory that RIPE allowed members to create many LIRs to request resources, so that those members had a greater chance of receiving large amounts of resources. If the above scenario is correct, this is massive failing on RIPE's part, and they were the direct cause of the issue they are now trying to charge us for. Can someone from RIPE please comment? 2. Clearly RIPE must have a budget for expenditure and income for the forthcoming year, can RIPE indicate whether they have a planned increase in both income and expenditure and what reasons are given for any increase especially in expenditure. RIPE need to be far more transparent and also understand that they are spending our money, their stewardship needs to be improved. As someone else has said, why does RIPE have a multi-million Euro PR budget. They are the only people in this space in Europe, what does this budget go towards? 3. Why does Model 2 seem to have an upper cap of 8 000 Euros? This means that large companies with millions of IPv4 addresses aren’t paying a proportional share of the costs. RIPE’s pricing should be fair to ALL members, and charging a disproportionally low amount to multi-national corporations seems like RIPE are just shifting the cost on to smaller LIRs. We believe that the way that RIPE should charge FOR IT'S CORE SERVICES is through set fees for resources, as is similar to model 2, but that the prices on model 2 are far too high. RIPE must also decrease it's expenditure. They offer so many training and community based sessions that are often at in person locations, and the vast majority of the time, those events are free to members. Many small companies would love to be able to send colleagues out to these events, but due to travel/accommodation costs, they simply cannot. It doesn't make sense then that the small companies should have to bear the burden through increased membership prices of financing these events. We would be more accepting if these events were supplemented by RIPE if it truly is for the good of the internet community, but we think that there should be a price to pay from members for these events. If RIPE want to increase our membership costs, and don't provide justification as to why, and don't put forward actionable plans to decrease their expenditure, we will be voting NO to both of the proposed models. George Porter Integrated Network Services Ltd 01928 238390 07956592260 george.porter(a)in-services.co.uk Note. This email is confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender -----Original Message----- From: ncc-announce <ncc-announce-bounces(a)ripe.net> On Behalf Of Simon Jan Haytink Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 9:35 AM To: ncc-announce(a)ripe.net Subject: [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 [You don't often get email from simon(a)ripe.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] Dear RIPE NCC members, We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023. In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers. The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership. One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members. To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as: Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model. You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/me… We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years. I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss(a)ripe.net) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM. The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations I look forward to your input. Kind regards, Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC Summary 7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023 References Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-ch… Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentatio…

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Josh Jameson 10 Mar '23

10 Mar '23

Dear all, There's a lot of misinformation being spread around on members-discuss regarding the new pricing model 2 scheme. I think RIPE management did a poor job of implementing a quotation system on a spread sheet. People are failing to calculate their pricing correctly. Would it really have been out of the question to have a temporary calculator on the RIPE site that would show the proposed costs for a member? I'm sorry to say that we need something that allows us all to be on the same page regarding fees to make a well informed decision. Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd

1 0