The issue is not a bigger budget. If such companies as Orange, T-Mobile, MTC and many other big players will pay a fair membership tax based on the resources they hold, micro LIR (I don't know if the mean and sense of an LIR can even to be imposed to such a LIR that holds 256 ipv4 addresses, they even cannot make assignments) will have to pay much less.

The only fair model ==> LIR FEE = RIPE NCC BUDGET x ~1.1 / RIPE NCC managed ipv4 x all LIR Allocations/Assignments.

If the community will not change the charging scheme to such a model, it will be clear that somebody is protecting big players.

best,

Sergiu

13.03.2023, 10:58, "Alarig Le Lay via members-discuss" <members-discuss@ripe.net>:

Hi,

On Tue 07 Mar 2023 11:02:02 GMT, Kaj Niemi wrote:
An obvious option would be to reduce budgeted RIPE NCC expenditure to
the level of forecasted revenue. This is what most normal companies,
without assured funding, must do.

I totally agree. If we look at the Draft Activity Plan and Budget 2023
https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/october-2022/documentation-and-archive/draft-ripe-ncc-activity-plan-and-budget-2023
Right in the summary it’s written “Other factors affecting our budget
include high inflation and costs related to major projects planned for
2023, especially our planned migration of some services to the cloud”
So, if the budget is scarce, why continue such project in the first
place?

With that being the first justification of the budget, it’s not
sufficient to increase the members participation for me.

--
Alarig

_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/ripe-ncc-members-discuss%40itns.md