Hello

A better solution would be to promote ipv6 and maybe offer incentives for ipv6 ready LIRs (or penalize LIRs that are not ipv6 ready).

We need to make sure any ipv4 address is mapped to an ipv6 address so we can finally start to phase ipv4 out.

Bogdan


On Jan 17, 2019, at 8:54 AM, ivaylo <ivaylo@bglans.net> wrote:

Hello,

I 100% agree with you !

As many resources one LIR consumes as bigger membership fee should be.

Even to better optimize resources usage, the fee can be calculated on /24
basis.

example:
/17 = 128 x /24
fee = (128-4)*350 = 43 400 euro/year fee



P.S. in your example should be: (32-1)*1400 = 39 200 euro.

Ivaylo Josifov
Varteh LTD
Varna Bulgaria

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019, TrustHost wrote:

Hi.
 
I think it would be great if the payment depends on the quantity the
resources for one account. It would help to return unused IPv4 in free pool
for new business. The companies, who really use big networks won't notice
such changes. But who received the resources before 2012 and has unused /19
and maybe more will think if they really need such big blocks.
 
For example we can implement the next charging scheme.
If one account has more than /20 (not equivalent 4x/22 or the blocks were
allocated before 2012) the next /22 ownership will cost some price (e.g.
1400 euro).
 
For example:
There is /17 IPv4 block for one LIR account.
/17 = 32x/22.
The total price for this account is (32-4)*1400 = 39 200 euro.
 
I think the members must have equal rights, regardless of the year of the
membership started.
 
------------------
Kind regards,
Boris Loginov
 
TrustHost LLC



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/admin%40redcluster.org