- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

New Charging Scheme
by TrustHost 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

11 17

Re: [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme
by CloudScape 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

We have also had issues with RIPE refusing to accept information and official UK documents (that we had to pay to obtain), then demanding documents that simply do not exist in the UK. I'm not sure if RIPE needs to understand different countries have dfferent rules/regulations and legal documents or if the rules need to be changed to allow them to accept "equivalent" legal documents. Either way, the current situation, is very unsatisfactory and needs to be addressed. Regards Robert Harrison CloudScape Connect Ltd At 14:52:00 19/02/2019, you wrote: > From: Patterson, Richard (Sky Network Services (SNS)) > Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 12:44 PM [snip] > > It felt like the IPv4-conservative approach was being applied to IPv6, and > that kind of defeats the purpose IMO. I have experienced this as well. For technical reasons (not convenience), I needed another /29 (or rather 6 /32's). This turned out to take too long and too much of my time, so I gave up and opened another LIR simply for the /29 IPv6. Of course that meant I had to buy one less /22 IPv4 on the free market, so the tight IPv6 policies directly caused faster depletion of IPv4. Though I don't know whether this happens often enough to be significant, it's still ass-backwards. -- Regards, Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. Please quote relevant replies. _______________________________________________ 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/info%40cloudscapecon…

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme
by Jørgen Hovland 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

6 7

Re: [members-discuss] RIPE legal: Please stop this madness!
by Terrence Koeman 18 Feb '19

18 Feb '19

If you don't need the /22, then why are you registering an additional LIR? You can get ipv6 for your existing LIR... BTW, legally RIPE's position seems correct. The German partnership seems very much the same as a Dutch partnership. A LIR needs to be in the name of a legal person, and a partnership is not a legal person distinct from the partners. The liability would pass through the partnership when being sued and is just a convenience when suing that's identical to all partners being named as plaintiffs. So, if liability is severable and not joint, I'd suggest the proper way to name the entity is as "[and¦,] [and ] trading as ". If liability is joint and not severable (ie each partner or at least the main partner is always 100% liable for the partnership), then RIPE's suggestion to roll the LIRs for the partnership into the LIR of the main partner is correct, as there is no legal difference between the partnership (as non-legal person) and the main partner (ie the main partner is the only one that may sign and is 100% liable for the partnership, so legally there's no distinction at all between a contract signed as the partnership or the legal person that is the main partner). That there is another partner in the partnership is legally irrelevant in that case. I would guess that liability for partnerships is joint in Germany as it is in The Netherlands and RIPE is correct. It may make you angry, but RIPE didn't make the laws! -- Regards, Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. Please quote relevant replies. Spelling errors courtesy of my 'smart'phone. ________________________________ From: Markus Stalder <ms(a)lightupnet.de> Sent: Monday, 18 February 2019 11:21 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE legal: Please stop this madness! > --On 18.02.2019 09:24 +0000 Brandon Butterworth <brandon(a)rd.bbc.co.uk> > wrote: > > > My thought too. What are they playing at giving you an additional /22 > > which are supposed to be for new companies only. > > > > If I were you I'd shut up and do as they ask to collect my bonus /22, > > Useless reply because you missed the point completely. > > You should not tar everyone with the same brush, buddy. > > They can keep the /22, we don't need it. > > > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen > > Markus Stalder > ms(a)lightupnet.de > > Lightup Network Solutions GmbH & Co. KG > http://www.lightupnet.de > > Fon +49 (0)69 962 4456 0 (Zentrale) > Fon +49 (0)69 962 4456 11 (Durchwahl) > Fax +49 (0)69 962 4456 20 > __________________________________________________ > > Please direct all support issues directly to > support(a)lightupnet.de. This will guarantee fastest > processing possible. > > Bitte richten Sie alle Support-Anfragen direkt an > support(a)lightupnet.de. Nur so ist die schnellst- > mögliche Bearbeitung gewährleistet. > __________________________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > 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-…

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Billing scheme
by Terrence Koeman 28 Jan '19

28 Jan '19

Why would it be a "vast amount" of LIRs that have to quit? Why not a few? Also, apparently my crystal ball is bigger, because I see option: 3) -Members that can pay yearly will do so. -New members will know in advance they have to pay yearly and will do so. -Members will know not to open a new LIR if they can't pay the yearly fee. -RIPE will give the relatively few members that can't immediately pay yearly some flexibility in a transition period of 1 to 2 years on a case-by-case basis. During this time, these members should be able to save and plan for their yearly payment. That's more than reasonable. After this transitional period all members pay yearly, all complexity is gone (annual fee, paid annually: simple) and *more importantly*: so is the confusion about quarterly payments on an annual fee (especially when a member has multiple LIRs). We have seen this confusion repeatedly. Perhaps it's a cultural difference, but a nontrivial amount of people just don’t seem to get the fact that the membership fee is an ANNUAL fee and it remains an ANNUAL fee even when one is allowed to pay it in multiple terms. Eliminating that confusion is a good reason to me all on its own. -- Regards, Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. Please quote relevant replies. > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net> On Behalf Of > Dominic Schallert > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 4:06 PM > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Billing scheme > > I’m afraid that with this change, the whole billing process will even get > more complex and frustrating due to the large amount of smaller LIRs with > limited budget. Looking into the crystal ball, two possible things could > happen: 1) a vast amount of smaller LIRs and multi-LIRs will have to quit > because they simply can’t afford to pay all at once 2) as previously > announced, special payment agreements will be established for LIRs with > cash limitations (which means not much will change, except increased > billing complexity). Considering this, I haven’t seen any good reason for > this change yet. > > > > Am 08.01.2019 um 13:57 schrieb Isp-Broadcast <qendrim.kryeziu@isp- > broadcast.net>: > > > > friend, > > > > how much is the invoice for this year whether it is possible for > delivery, for 1 year and if you have the most paid offer for many years > with receiving a free year > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 12:22, Terrence Koeman <terrence(a)darkness-reigns.com> > wrote: > >> > >> With all the confusion around billing I've seen on this list, I > understand RIPE discontinuing their service of allowing quarterly > payments. > >> > >> You can get a loan to bridge the first year and save up for subsequent > years, essentially replacing RIPE's free service by a commercial one with > an interest for the first year and by saving up yourself for the following > years. > >> > >> The extra costs of this change are only the interest for such a > business loan (which depends on the inflation of the currency your > business uses, but for EUR currently around 3-6% afaik). Even if it were > 10% interest on the €1k4 fee it'd be €140 spread out over a year > (=€12/month), that should not be a burden even for a very small business. > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy > >> Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. > >> > >> Please quote relevant replies. > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net> On Behalf Of > >>> Marketing KTECHNOLOGY > >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 9:23 AM > >>> To: Serhii Khomenko <khomenko.serhii.m(a)gmail.com> > >>> Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > >>> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Billing scheme > >>> > >>> Hi, the same problem here. > >>> > >>> I understand the problem for managing so many invoices but it became > hard > >>> for little busunesses. > >>> > >>> Il giorno mar 8 gen 2019, 07:44 Serhii Khomenko > >>> <khomenko.serhii.m(a)gmail.com <mailto:khomenko.serhii.m@gmail.com> > ha > >>> scritto: > >>> > >>> > >>> Dear RIPC NCC, > >>> I have received a notification that billing scheme would be changed > >>> from > >>> quarterly to annually. But it will be impossible for me to pay such > >>> big > >>> amount of money in one time. I ask you not to change the payment > >>> scheme. > >>> As I'm a private entrepreneur, it will be impossible to pay such > >>> amount > >>> in one payment. > >>> > >>> Hope for your understanding. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Kind regards, > >>> Serhii Khomenko > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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/marketing%40ktechnology.it > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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/qendrim.kryeziu%40isp-broadcast.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/ds%40schallert.com

3 3

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Billing Changes: Transition Arrangements Available
by TrustHost 28 Jan '19

28 Jan '19

3 2

LIR’s billing issues with RIPE NCC, need support
by Juri 28 Jan '19

28 Jan '19

Dear RIPE NCC Members i.e. LIR! RIPE77 meeting is over but some questions still active and I want to bring them up for discussion. This is long-read, but please read it, it’s important. I work at ISP company and work a lot of with RIPE NCC as well as for LIR management and registrations. I want RIPE NCC become better for all LIRs and try to participate. For long time I face with RIPE NCC strange billing issues, and I feel not comfortable with them. I run ISP company and I understand how to manage customers and how usually billing for services of the IT company should work. I will try to split different issues in different emails. First I want to say that I tried to find an answer for my question from Finance department of the RIPE NCC, I spent a time for that and I found that it was not correct place for that. I was forwarded to RIPE NCC Board for such discussion. I wrote my experience at RIPE77 Meeting to the Board and got feedback that the ideas and facts I explained to them should be discussed in Members-Discuss list because they are not described in Policies. So that’s my try to do that. Let me show you several simple billing issues. They will be related to companies who pays much more than other companies to RIPE NCC. These are Multi LIR companies. Yes, everybody knows that company may have several LIR accounts at RIPE NCC if company pays membership and setup fees. This is quite normal and a lot of companies use this ability. Let’s start. What kind of issues do we have. Let me explain most important of them. 1) If a company want to do anything (transfer a part or merge with your existing company) with one of your LIRs RIPE NCC will ask you to pay till the end of the year for all LIRs. This is not fear and not correct because RIPE NCC really doesn’t give a LIR service for that companies. 2) Let’s say you just opened in December new one LIR for your company (and paid fees for the last 4th part of the year + setup fees) and want to do something with other LIR resources on account of the same company. RIPE NCC will ask to pay full year for LIR that were opened just in current year. What we have? You just get service for last part of the year but you should pay for membership for LIR for the time that it was not existed. This is insane for IT company to overcharge members for the past time. 3) If one company merge another one - they get still limitations for keeping several LIRs for several years. Such things should not happen. It was not so sometime before but now that happens. What I see? RIPE NCC overcharge LIRs. Why? It was not so some amount of time ago. RIPE NCC didn’t care about that, but they changed it without any discussion with members. Now I want to answer for Important question for those members who wish to start telling me about something else.... I will give you an answer here. All RIPE NCC members have the limit for changes/transfers and etc as 2 years (24 month) of hold time. If this time should be changed - it’s a way to Policy development process. Everybody believe that expenses for having extra LIR should be for 2 years (24 month), let’s say this is what we have and this delay is written in RIPE NCC documents. If we want to discuss this time - it's other one discussion. In real life this 2 years means 3 years (and usually *N). LIRs have to pay extra membership fees for (3-4 years)*N of LIRs, but not for 2 years as it should be. I find this unfair for LIRs. I want all LIRs have clear billing and pay for services/membership that we have really consumed. This is normal and correct to have clear and good billing. What do I suggest? 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. Please support me and reply to this email. Or write your opinion. I believe RIPE NCC should work better for LIRs. Your voice is important. Juri ------------ NTX DataCenter/Hosting +7 (499) 346-76-29

14 13

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Billing Changes: Transition Arrangements Available
by Aleksey Bulgakov 22 Jan '19

22 Jan '19

Hi. The redistribution in 2018 was EUR 359.23. You received EUR 179.64, due to your member's fees were for half year in 2017. -------------- Regards, Alexey вт, 22 янв. 2019 г. в 17:02, Dominic Schallert <ds(a)schallert.com>: > > So this means a surplus redistribution of EUR 567.51,- per LIR in 2019? really? seems a lot to me. In 2018 it had been only around EUR 179.64 per LIR. > > Mit besten Grüßen > Kind Regards > > Dominic Schallert, BA > > > schallert.com e.U. | Hauptstraße 35b, 6800 Feldkirch, Austria > > FN: 440372g | UID: ATU66209211 | Gerichtsstand: Feldkirch > > Tel.: +43 680 146 1947 | Fax: +43 134 242 642 616 > > www.schallert.com | office(a)schallert.com > > > > > Am 22.01.2019 um 14:03 schrieb Gwen van Berne <ripencc-management(a)ripe.net>: > > Recognising that some of our members may need help to make this transition, we are able to offer a credit arrangement for those with a genuine need. Members should also note that with the redistribution of the surplus from 2018, the annual contribution for 2019 of EUR 1,400 will be compensated by the excess paid contribution of 2018, which will reduce the 2019 payment obligation for a single LIR to EUR 832.49. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/aleksbulgakov%40gmai… -- ---------- Best regards, Alexey Bulgakov Tel.: +7 (926)690-87-29

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Billing Changes: Transition Arrangements Available
by Dominic Schallert 22 Jan '19

22 Jan '19

So this means a surplus redistribution of EUR 567.51,- per LIR in 2019? really? seems a lot to me. In 2018 it had been only around EUR 179.64 per LIR. Mit besten Grüßen Kind Regards Dominic Schallert, BA schallert.com e.U. | Hauptstraße 35b, 6800 Feldkirch, Austria FN: 440372g | UID: ATU66209211 | Gerichtsstand: Feldkirch Tel.: +43 680 146 1947 | Fax: +43 134 242 642 616 www.schallert.com <http://www.schallert.com/> | office(a)schallert.com <mailto:office@schallert.com> > Am 22.01.2019 um 14:03 schrieb Gwen van Berne <ripencc-management(a)ripe.net>: > > Recognising that some of our members may need help to make this transition, we are able to offer a credit arrangement for those with a genuine need. Members should also note that with the redistribution of the surplus from 2018, the annual contribution for 2019 of EUR 1,400 will be compensated by the excess paid contribution of 2018, which will reduce the 2019 payment obligation for a single LIR to EUR 832.49.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme
by Jørgen Hovland 22 Jan '19

22 Jan '19

1 0