I'd imagine because those holding larger resources voted for the revised 2015 charging scheme (https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-620) - and those holding smaller resources forgot to vote. I've no idea why the 2015 policy was introduced. A single flat fee per LIR in no way encourages those hoarding unused resources to hand them back. A flat fee per /24 on the other hand does. This would penalise large resource holders - ultimately forcing them to relinquish resources or pass on/absorb costs with their own customers. The whole trading market would disappear when there is an associated cost with sitting on resources waiting for a buyer. Its common sense. Why isn't it in place? Who knows. Benjamin Lessani -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Pawel Wojtal Sent: 21 July 2016 20:31 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Sign-up fee for additional LIR account On 21.07.2016 19:50, webhoster Info wrote:
just an idea: every LIR should pay a yearly fee for each ip or /24 in his account starting at 01/17 <x-apple-data-detectors://0>. You will get back a huge amount of unused ips.
It is simple, it is fair, it is effective. This will solve the problem for twenty years. I do not understand why we can not proceed in this way? femur ---- 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/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.