- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

AW: [members-discuss] Please STOP to spam / list removal requests
by Niels Dettenbach 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> -- Quote -- > This is an email for all "Ripe Members"... > > Pleae use "members-discuss@ripe. > net" only for important question!!! Sorry, but this discussion is related to the lists topic and - as the current traffic on this list let assume - seems to be "important" for many RIPE members. This is not an announcement only list - so this is not Spam. just btw: Who decides what is "important" or not for RIPE members? Are you able to recommend a better list or place for this RIPE member related topic? > ...please remove xxx(a)yyy.tld from this list ... You have the option to unsubscribe this list in your RIPE portal account or if you are not interested just in this thread just filter it (i.e. by subject or id) out i.e. into your /dev/null. Best regards, Niels. --- Niels Dettenbach ND2000-RIPE Skyway.net - Gesellschaft fuer satellitengestuetzte Internet Kommunikation mbH http://www.skyway.net --- Syndicat IT&Internet http://www.syndicat.com

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 (fwd)
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> It's not charging retroactively. Retroactively charging for the PI space > would be sending invoices out for every year from '92 to to date, which > is not happening. > > What is happening that the price has changed from 0 to 50 EUR/year > (well, the draft price). mind you that PI registrants never agreed to any contract that allows "price changes" and that "choosing" to have their allocations removeed instead of either paying a LIR, with whom they would usually have an agreement that only covers a one time payment, or several thousand euros to ripe directly, OR GIVE UP THEIR ALLOCATIONS and therefore cause significant damage to their business :P is pure blackmail. you cant first tell someone "sure we will register ip sppace for your company, please pay 2500 euros which covers our work and the first 2 years in which potentially our ripe-score could be affected by this registration (PI and AS numbers only count for 2 years in the score), and then go "oops, now you have to either pay a few 1000 to ripe OR a few hundred to us (most customers have as numberrs AND PI space)"... thats blackmail. also ARIN doesnt charge their "new" DirectAssignment fee to "old" direct assignments, and ripe never tried to bill PRE-RIR registrations either. there probably is a very good reason for that... implementing a new pricelist? fine.. but only for new customers. mind you: direct assignments can be revoked if their use is no longer in agreement with the original provided reasons, so there is no problem in checking all of them if they are actually used for the original purpose, there is a problem in forcing people to pay and threatten to remove their ip assignments if they dont, if there are no agreements covering that. -- Sven Olaf Kamphuis CB3ROB DataServices Phone: +31/87-8747479 Skype: CB3ROB MSN: sven(a)cb3rob.net C.V.: http://www.linkedin.com/in/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 Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > Hank Nussbacher wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Andrea Cima wrote: > > > >>> 4) " - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per assignment > >>> and the > >>> fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - Operates for all direct > >>> assignments? or Only new direct assignments (included after 3 May, > >>> 2009)? > >> > >> All Assignments made since 1992 will be included. > > > > I have stated it before and I'll state it again - changing the billing > > rules retroactively is wrong. Maybe even EU legally wrong. Allocations > > made in the 1990s should not be billed. By all means recover > > unannounced allocations by whatever means necessary, but charging LIRs > > for allocations made in 1995 is wrong. > > > > It's not charging retroactively. Retroactively charging for the PI space > would be sending invoices out for every year from '92 to to date, which > is not happening. > > What is happening that the price has changed from 0 to 50 EUR/year > (well, the draft price). > > It's like an update of pricing or the terms and conditions, so you can > consider to either give your allocation back and won't be charged in the > future or you'll pay the price. > > This has nothing to do with retroactively charging. It's just a change > of the fee from now and on. > > Kind regards, > Martin List-Petersen > -- > Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair > http://www.airwire.ie > Phone: 091-865 968 > > > X-CONTACT-FILTER-MATCH: "ripe.net" >

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. unfortunately, in the agenda for that specific GM it was presented as if there would be the option for 3rd parties to register PI space directly with RIPE, like it used to be the case with internic in the past. Despite RIPEs newly announced rediculous prices, which come very close to running an actual LIR, compared to ARIN (arin only charges 100 dollars for direct assigned ip space for example) I have no issues with that construct and therefore didnt bother to go and vote against it. it was not mentioned that this would include EXISTING PI space and AS numbers. and yeah sure, we have a contract with our customers, verbal agreements are legally binding, especially if followed by a payment :P (having a payment relation by itself is already legally binding) unfortunately for RIPE those agreements only cover the effort to REGISTER the PI space in the first place, no renewal fees were ever mentioned. -this cannot be done, its blackmail!- now the funny thing is that our customers are already caving in and are willing to sign new contracts BUT they should not. caving in to blackmail is not a very good idea. -- Sven Olaf Kamphuis CB3ROB DataServices Phone: +31/87-8747479 Skype: CB3ROB MSN: sven(a)cb3rob.net C.V.: http://www.linkedin.com/in/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 Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> The product that the customer buys of the LIR should be giving more than > >> 50 EUR/year revenue, if not, you might not be in business for long. > > > > LIRS are NOT isps! > > > Not every LIR is an ISP, a lot of them are. If you assign PI to somebody > else, you have a provider/enduser relationship. That makes you a service > provider of some sort. Be it internet, content or hosting. > > > > the "product" bought from a LIR is the registration of IP space, usually > > at at one-time single payment that covered the increase in the billing > > score for 2 years if applicable and the administrative work. > > > > there are no "services" or "products" a LIR normally sells. > > > You have to have a contractual relationship with the enduser that has PI > now. You know that, right ? > > > > and there also is no question of "circumventing ripe membership fees" > > as those only apply to LIRs (that is, people willing to register IP space > > for others). > > Or entities, that don't want to deal with a LIR. > > > > the fact that -most- LIRs are part of an ISP or even some ASPs that fell > > for ripes jedi-mind-trick and became a LIR themselves, doesnt mean they > > HAVE to be part of an ISP. > > There are very few LIRs, that aren't providing some commercial product. > And even then 50 EUR/year is compared to the money they probably pay for > connectivity: > near to nothing. > > Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. > > Kind regards, > Martin List-Petersen > -- > Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair > http://www.airwire.ie > Phone: 091-865 968 > > > > X-CONTACT-FILTER-MATCH: "ripe.net" >

2 2

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> > -this cannot be done, its blackmail!- > > It's the RIPE membership (the LIRs), that change these policies, not the > NCC. The NCC has to action them. > > Has nothing to do with blackmail. At the end of the day, it's a decision > driven by RIPE members, who take an active role. > > Policies change, if you don't like'm you can try to change them again. > Just requires a majority approval for a policy proposal. > hiding behind "democratic internal processes" changes nothing to that fact. if the members of ripe decided ripe was not going to pay taxes this year, im quite sure that the democratic aspect would not warrant it from prosecution :P -- Sven Olaf Kamphuis CB3ROB DataServices Phone: +31/87-8747479 Skype: CB3ROB MSN: sven(a)cb3rob.net C.V.: http://www.linkedin.com/in/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 Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. > > > > unfortunately for RIPE those agreements only cover the effort to REGISTER > > the PI space in the first place, no renewal fees were ever mentioned. > > > > -this cannot be done, its blackmail!- > > It's the RIPE membership (the LIRs), that change these policies, not the > NCC. The NCC has to action them. > > Has nothing to do with blackmail. At the end of the day, it's a decision > driven by RIPE members, who take an active role. > > Policies change, if you don't like'm you can try to change them again. > Just requires a majority approval for a policy proposal. > > Kind regards, > Martin List-Petersen > -- > Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair > http://www.airwire.ie > Phone: 091-865 968 > > > > X-CONTACT-FILTER-MATCH: "ripe.net" >

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> > -this cannot be done, its blackmail!- > > It's the RIPE membership (the LIRs), that change these policies, not the > NCC. The NCC has to action them. > > Has nothing to do with blackmail. At the end of the day, it's a decision > driven by RIPE members, who take an active role. > > Policies change, if you don't like'm you can try to change them again. > Just requires a majority approval for a policy proposal. > hiding behind "democratic internal processes" changes nothing to that fact. if the members of ripe decided ripe was not going to pay taxes this year, im quite sure that the democratic aspect would not warrant it from prosecution :P -- Sven Olaf Kamphuis CB3ROB DataServices Phone: +31/87-8747479 Skype: CB3ROB MSN: sven(a)cb3rob.net C.V.: http://www.linkedin.com/in/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 Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. > > > > unfortunately for RIPE those agreements only cover the effort to REGISTER > > the PI space in the first place, no renewal fees were ever mentioned. > > > > -this cannot be done, its blackmail!- > > It's the RIPE membership (the LIRs), that change these policies, not the > NCC. The NCC has to action them. > > Has nothing to do with blackmail. At the end of the day, it's a decision > driven by RIPE members, who take an active role. > > Policies change, if you don't like'm you can try to change them again. > Just requires a majority approval for a policy proposal. > > Kind regards, > Martin List-Petersen > -- > Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair > http://www.airwire.ie > Phone: 091-865 968 > > > > X-CONTACT-FILTER-MATCH: "ripe.net" >

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> Not every LIR is an ISP, a lot of them are. If you assign PI to somebody > else, you have a provider/enduser relationship. That makes you a service > provider of some sort. Be it internet, content or hosting. no, you dont. the customer usually asks to just register ip space and an AS number which he then announces himself to transits of -his- choice. if the customer happens to be in lets say russia it doesnt make much sense to have their network announced in amsterdam or germany now does it.. thats the whole point of PI space in the first place, its PROVIDER INDEPENDANT, from day 1. -- Sven Olaf Kamphuis CB3ROB DataServices Phone: +31/87-8747479 Skype: CB3ROB MSN: sven(a)cb3rob.net C.V.: http://www.linkedin.com/in/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 Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> The product that the customer buys of the LIR should be giving more than > >> 50 EUR/year revenue, if not, you might not be in business for long. > > > > LIRS are NOT isps! > > > Not every LIR is an ISP, a lot of them are. If you assign PI to somebody > else, you have a provider/enduser relationship. That makes you a service > provider of some sort. Be it internet, content or hosting. > > > > the "product" bought from a LIR is the registration of IP space, usually > > at at one-time single payment that covered the increase in the billing > > score for 2 years if applicable and the administrative work. > > > > there are no "services" or "products" a LIR normally sells. > > > You have to have a contractual relationship with the enduser that has PI > now. You know that, right ? > > > > and there also is no question of "circumventing ripe membership fees" > > as those only apply to LIRs (that is, people willing to register IP space > > for others). > > Or entities, that don't want to deal with a LIR. > > > > the fact that -most- LIRs are part of an ISP or even some ASPs that fell > > for ripes jedi-mind-trick and became a LIR themselves, doesnt mean they > > HAVE to be part of an ISP. > > There are very few LIRs, that aren't providing some commercial product. > And even then 50 EUR/year is compared to the money they probably pay for > connectivity: > near to nothing. > > Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. > > Kind regards, > Martin List-Petersen > -- > Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair > http://www.airwire.ie > Phone: 091-865 968 > > > > X-CONTACT-FILTER-MATCH: "ripe.net" >

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by Sven Olaf Kamphuis 19 Jun '09

19 Jun '09

> Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. unfortunately, in the agenda for that specific GM it was presented as if there would be the option for 3rd parties to register PI space directly with RIPE, like it used to be the case with internic in the past. Despite RIPEs newly announced rediculous prices, which come very close to running an actual LIR, compared to ARIN (arin only charges 100 dollars for direct assigned ip space for example) I have no issues with that construct and therefore didnt bother to go and vote against it. it was not mentioned that this would include EXISTING PI space and AS numbers. and yeah sure, we have a contract with our customers, verbal agreements are legally binding, especially if followed by a payment :P (having a payment relation by itself is already legally binding) unfortunately for RIPE those agreements only cover the effort to REGISTER the PI space in the first place, no renewal fees were ever mentioned. -this cannot be done, its blackmail!- now the funny thing is that our customers are already caving in and are willing to sign new contracts BUT they should not. caving in to blackmail is not a very good idea. -- Sven Olaf Kamphuis CB3ROB DataServices Phone: +31/87-8747479 Skype: CB3ROB MSN: sven(a)cb3rob.net C.V.: http://www.linkedin.com/in/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 Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: > >> The product that the customer buys of the LIR should be giving more than > >> 50 EUR/year revenue, if not, you might not be in business for long. > > > > LIRS are NOT isps! > > > Not every LIR is an ISP, a lot of them are. If you assign PI to somebody > else, you have a provider/enduser relationship. That makes you a service > provider of some sort. Be it internet, content or hosting. > > > > the "product" bought from a LIR is the registration of IP space, usually > > at at one-time single payment that covered the increase in the billing > > score for 2 years if applicable and the administrative work. > > > > there are no "services" or "products" a LIR normally sells. > > > You have to have a contractual relationship with the enduser that has PI > now. You know that, right ? > > > > and there also is no question of "circumventing ripe membership fees" > > as those only apply to LIRs (that is, people willing to register IP space > > for others). > > Or entities, that don't want to deal with a LIR. > > > > the fact that -most- LIRs are part of an ISP or even some ASPs that fell > > for ripes jedi-mind-trick and became a LIR themselves, doesnt mean they > > HAVE to be part of an ISP. > > There are very few LIRs, that aren't providing some commercial product. > And even then 50 EUR/year is compared to the money they probably pay for > connectivity: > near to nothing. > > Anyhow, this whole matter was also already raised at the GM. > > Kind regards, > Martin List-Petersen > -- > Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobail an Iarthair > http://www.airwire.ie > Phone: 091-865 968 > > > > X-CONTACT-FILTER-MATCH: "ripe.net" >

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by alopez＠adif.es 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Please remove alopez(a)adif.es From the list. ----- Mensaje original ----- De: Nafis Dwaalster [nafis(a)dwaalster.nl] Enviado: 18/06/2009 18:44 ZE2 Para: members-discuss(a)ripe.net Asunto: Re: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 Ripe, Please remove nafis(a)dwaalster.nl as well from the list thank you Nafis 2009/6/18 Adapt Service Desk <servicedesk(a)adaptplc.com> > Ripe, > > Please remove us from this discussion thread. It is totally irrelevant to > us and is filling our mailbox with junk. > > You may have the following e-mail addresses on record, > > servicedesk(a)adaptplc.com > support(a)mnet.co.uk > hostmaster(a)adaptplc.com > hostmaster(a)mnet.co.uk > > please remove them all. > > > Regards, > Raj Bola > Service Desk Manager > > adapt > New Broad Street House, 35 New Broad Street, London EC2M 1NH > t: +44 (0)845 304 3046 > e: servicedesk(a)adaptplc.com > > www.adaptplc.com > > adapt, the independent managed services provider offering the broadest > choice of next generation technologies, and doing right by our customers. > > adapt to success! We're ranked 15th in the 2008 Tech Track 100. > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto: > members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net] On Behalf Of ?????? ?????? > Sent: 18 June 2009 12:56 > To: Hostmaster; Natalya Petrova; members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > Hi All! > > There's no such document in RIPE database. > But I suppose Natalya is speaking about this: > > "[Apologies for duplicate emails] > > Dear Colleagues, > > The RIPE NCC is currently formulating the Draft Charging Scheme 2010. > The Draft Charging Scheme 2010 will take into account the requirements of > policy proposal 2007-01, "Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users > from the RIPE NCC", and the discussions that took place at the RIPE NCC > General Meeting in May 2009 regarding the 2010 Charging Scheme. > > The main features of the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 will be: > > - As in previous years, there will be five membership categories - Extra > Small, Small, Medium, Large and Extra Large > - The 2010 fee for each membership category will be the same as for 2009 > - An algorithm will determine a score that decides what category a member > belongs to > - The score will be based on Provider Aggregatable (PA) IPv4 and PA IPv6 > allocated over time > - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per assignment and the > fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment > > The RIPE NCC will publish the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 at the beginning > of July 2009. The RIPE NCC Executive Board will then monitor discussion and > input from the RIPE NCC membership before publishing a final version of the > Draft Charging Scheme 2010 by 9 September 2009. The RIPE NCC membership will > vote on this version at the RIPE NCC General Meeting on 7 October 2009. > > The RIPE NCC notes that this proposal for the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 is > subject to change based on advice from the RIPE NCC's lawyers on tax and > legal issues. > > Membership discussion of the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 proposal can take > place at <members-discuss(a)ripe.net>. > > Best regards, > > Axel Pawlik > Managing Director > RIPE NCC" > > Kind Regards > Sergey Sulava > > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto: > members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net] On Behalf Of Hostmaster > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:22 PM > To: Natalya Petrova; members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > Privyet Natalya > > Where is this document? I cant see it on RIPE? > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Natalya Petrova > Sent: 18 June 2009 11:29 > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > RegID: kz.kazaktelecom > > Good morning, dear colleagues! > Thanks for your message. > I have read on a site the information be relative Charging Scheme > 2010. There are some questions for me. > I ask the help in the explanatory. > Questions: > 1) " - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per assignment > and the > fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - It mentions only PI? or > PA? or PI+PA? > 2) "fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - It every month a > payment? or every quarter? or for a year? > 3) "fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - It is payment for what > quantity of addresses (50EUR= ? IPs)? > 4) " - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per assignment > and the > fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - Operates for all direct > assignments? or Only new direct assignments (included after 3 May, > 2009)? > I shall be very grateful for explanatories. > Thanks for the help and understanding. > Yours faithfully, > Natalya > > > *Disclaimer:* > This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information > intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If > you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are > hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this > message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. > > *Ограничения:* > Данное сообщение (включая любые вложения) может содержать > конфиденциальную информацию и быть предназначенным исключительно > для личности или организации, которой оно адресовано. Если Вы не > являетесь надлежащим адресатом, то настоящим Вы уведомлены, что любое > раскрытие, копирование, распространение или использование содержания > этого сообщения строго запрещено. > > > > This message has been scanned for viruses by Mail Control - > www.adaptplc.com > > -- Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards, Nafis Dwaalster

2 1

Please STOP to spam to members-discuss@ripe.net
by smarco＠libero.it 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

This is an email for all "Ripe Members"... Pleae use "members-discuss@ripe. net" only for important question!!! Thanks for support Best Regards

1 0

AW: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
by Marcus.Gerdon 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Sorry, but maybe you shouldn't put daily-use business email addresses into mailing-lists? Someone has to have that configured at any point in time. Ever took a look into the LIR portal? Just unsubscribe there (under 'General')... Btw, replying to all including a mailing list like the one you're complaining about is better behaviour? Marcus ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Engineering IP Services Versatel West GmbH Unterste-Wilms-Strasse 29 D-44143 Dortmund Fon: +49-(0)231-399-4486 | Fax: +49-(0)231-399-4491 marcus.gerdon(a)versatel.de | www.versatel.de Sitz der Gesellschaft: Dortmund | Registergericht: Dortmund HRB 21738 Geschäftsführer: Marc Lützenkirchen, Dr. Hai Cheng, Dr. Max Padberg, Peter Schindler ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AS8881 / AS8638 / AS13270 | MG3031-RIPE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Adapt > Service Desk > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2009 14:22 > An: s.sulava(a)unistream.com; Hostmaster; Natalya Petrova; > members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Betreff: RE: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > Ripe, > > Please remove us from this discussion thread. It is totally > irrelevant to us and is filling our mailbox with junk. > > You may have the following e-mail addresses on record, > > servicedesk(a)adaptplc.com > support(a)mnet.co.uk > hostmaster(a)adaptplc.com > hostmaster(a)mnet.co.uk > > please remove them all. > > > Regards, > Raj Bola > Service Desk Manager > > adapt > New Broad Street House, 35 New Broad Street, London EC2M 1NH > t: +44 (0)845 304 3046 > e: servicedesk(a)adaptplc.com > > www.adaptplc.com > > adapt, the independent managed services provider offering the > broadest choice of next generation technologies, and doing > right by our customers. > > adapt to success! We're ranked 15th in the 2008 Tech Track 100. > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of ?????? ?????? > Sent: 18 June 2009 12:56 > To: Hostmaster; Natalya Petrova; members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > Hi All! > > There's no such document in RIPE database. > But I suppose Natalya is speaking about this: > > "[Apologies for duplicate emails] > > Dear Colleagues, > > The RIPE NCC is currently formulating the Draft Charging Scheme 2010. > The Draft Charging Scheme 2010 will take into account the > requirements of policy proposal 2007-01, "Direct Internet > Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC", and the > discussions that took place at the RIPE NCC General Meeting > in May 2009 regarding the 2010 Charging Scheme. > > The main features of the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 will be: > > - As in previous years, there will be five membership > categories - Extra Small, Small, Medium, Large and Extra Large > - The 2010 fee for each membership category will be the same > as for 2009 > - An algorithm will determine a score that decides what > category a member belongs to > - The score will be based on Provider Aggregatable (PA) IPv4 > and PA IPv6 allocated over time > - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per > assignment and the fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment > > The RIPE NCC will publish the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 at > the beginning of July 2009. The RIPE NCC Executive Board will > then monitor discussion and input from the RIPE NCC > membership before publishing a final version of the Draft > Charging Scheme 2010 by 9 September 2009. The RIPE NCC > membership will vote on this version at the RIPE NCC General > Meeting on 7 October 2009. > > The RIPE NCC notes that this proposal for the Draft Charging > Scheme 2010 is subject to change based on advice from the > RIPE NCC's lawyers on tax and legal issues. > > Membership discussion of the Draft Charging Scheme 2010 > proposal can take place at <members-discuss(a)ripe.net>. > > Best regards, > > Axel Pawlik > Managing Director > RIPE NCC" > > Kind Regards > Sergey Sulava > > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Hostmaster > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:22 PM > To: Natalya Petrova; members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > Privyet Natalya > > Where is this document? I cant see it on RIPE? > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Natalya Petrova > Sent: 18 June 2009 11:29 > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net > Subject: [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010 > > RegID: kz.kazaktelecom > > Good morning, dear colleagues! > Thanks for your message. > I have read on a site the information be relative Charging Scheme > 2010. There are some questions for me. > I ask the help in the explanatory. > Questions: > 1) " - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per assignment > and the > fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - It mentions only PI? or > PA? or PI+PA? > 2) "fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - It every month a > payment? or every quarter? or for a year? > 3) "fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - It is payment for what > quantity of addresses (50EUR= ? IPs)? > 4) " - Direct assignments will have a recurring charge per assignment > and the > fee will be EUR 50 per direct assignment" - Operates for all direct > assignments? or Only new direct assignments (included after 3 May, > 2009)? > I shall be very grateful for explanatories. > Thanks for the help and understanding. > Yours faithfully, > Natalya > > > *Disclaimer:* > This message (including any attachments) contains > confidential information > intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is > protected by law. If > you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this > message and are > hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this > message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly > prohibited. > > *Ограничения:* > Данное сообщение (включая любые вложения) может содержать > конфиденциальную информацию и быть предназначенным исключительно > для личности или организации, которой оно адресовано. Если Вы не > являетесь надлежащим адресатом, то настоящим Вы уведомлены, что любое > раскрытие, копирование, распространение или использование содержания > этого сообщения строго запрещено. > > > > This message has been scanned for viruses by Mail Control - > www.adaptplc.com > >

2 1