Hello
Of course the people at RIPE made mistakes. In the old days they issued /8, /12, /14, /16, /18, /20 without any justification and demand for IP addresses.
At that time it seemed to them that the addresses would not run out.
at a later stage began to issue /22 to new members to ask about the need if they need it and for what.
it was also necessary to document the needs in order to get a larger network and mask.
as a result, the last years were granted /24
so we see a lot of discrimination due to time.
therefore, changes are needed to fix this.
Bringing in IP fees in the form of 50 Euro cents per year or 1 Euro. will free up addresses.
will appear in brokers, cheap address rental and access for all. their use and price of maintenance will normalize.
in large corporations are wasting a lot of addresses and no one there will make any decision to change this.
As long as it is free, nobody will change it.
and everyone who uses the Internet loses.
Pozdrawiam
Gabriel Sulka
From: Evgeniy Brodskiy <Evgeniy.Brodskiy@kyivstar.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 12:49 PM
To: Firma KOMPEX <gabi@kompex.pl>
Cc: 'Simon Lockhart' <simon@slimey.org>; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
Confidential/Конфіденційно
Hi Gabriel,
Strange to hear that IP addresses were wrongly issued. This is a fact. it could be partially true in some cases if somebody sell, rent or just hold and don’t use IPv4 at all.
But it LIRs using IPs right by their meaning to provide access to Internet, how it could be wrongly issued ?
You may say that for some LIRs the Internet access model is not optimal. That should be used dynamic address assignment or NAT44 or IPv6, etc. But each LIR has its own network and nobody can declare who and how have to build their
networks.
Trying to take away addresses from companies that use them to provide Internet access is also unethical, because this denies Internet access rights to users of these companies.
I think you will agree with me that free access to information and to Internet is a crucial for human rights.
-----Original Message-----
From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Firma KOMPEX
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 12:34 PM
To: 'Simon Lockhart' <simon@slimey.org>; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
we still don't understand each other.
European Union = equality and access to value for all on the same terms.
IP addresses were wrongly issued. This is a fact.
RIPE was not well run from its inception.
Addresses at the beginning of the uprising were distributed without thought and by the wrong people who made mistakes.
Addresses are a social good.
There can be no question of who should pay how much and how to pay LIR fees.
it should be fixed.
IP Addresses access policies must be regulated. because they have run out.
Lack of changes that will release frozen IPs and unused IP addresses will end up with statutory regulations and the creation of a law that will impose this on us if we do not regulate it ourselves.
The current IP address management policy is unethical.
It is discriminatory to both the currently emerging companies and their users.
if there is discrimination, and in this case 100% there is, then this should be equalized immediately.
Best Regard's/ Pozdrawiam
Gabriel Sulka
-------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Simon Lockhart
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
On Tue Apr 16, 2024 at 09:51:13AM +0200, m.terzioglu@prebits.de wrote:
> RIPE is non-profit organisation but the small LIRs are paying for the
> bigger LIRs.
No - everyone is paying an equal share of the costs of running an Internet *Registry*.
Long gone are the days where you can get IP addresses from RIPE (in any sensibly usable quantities).
RIPE is a Regional Internet *Registry*, not an IP shop or IP broker.
Using the land analogy, you don't go to RIPE to buy land, you go to RIPE to register your (ownership/claim on) land. I don't know about other countries, but in the UK we have the UK Land Registry where you register your land. If you want to buy land, you go to an estate agent. Whilst the UK Land Registry has a scale of registration costs based on the value (note, value not size) of land, it's not a very wide scale.
If you want more IPv4 space, you don't go to RIPE, you go to an IP broker (or purchase it privately). Once you've done that, you register your claim to those
IPv4 addresses with RIPE.
I cannot think of any pricing model for RIPE which would result in RIPE suddenly having lots of IPv4 addresses which can be re-distributed to LIRs.
Pretty much every proposal that has been posted over the last few weeks seem to have an undertone of "Look, here's some LIRs who have lots of IPv4 space.
Wah, it's not fair, and I want some of it for cheap from RIPE".
Simon
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
Unsubscribe:
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list