---

Doru Serdin Network Manager Office: +4 031 82 52 657 E-mail: doru.serdin@mediasat.ro

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer does not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

 

Everybody is still fighting about the wrong question.

The question everyone should be arguing about is why it costs 40 million a year to run an internet registry for 20,000~ members.

Sure, the bulk of the expense is due to navigating the legal landscape of multiple member nations, but you can't tell me that's 20-30 million a year in legal fee's.

On 4/16/24 9:31 AM, Petru Bunea wrote:

Where have I said it should be 1 EUR across the board? 

It doesn’t have to be 1 EUR, but it also doesn’t have to be 333 the difference. It can be progressively cheaper, but not at such a large difference. 

Also, FYI, UK Gov or any Gov, could always put back IPv4 if they find it to be too expensive. Just like they force people and companies to put back on the market real estate that have a very high yearly tax. How would that work out for a change? Call this a tax hike on public property, like IP addresses. Maybe they would in fact like it, since it’s their way of doing business.

Otherwise, with this model, we will just move the burden from the big ISP/companies/resource holders to the smaller ones. 

Thanks.

On 16 Apr 2024, at 17:25, Daniel Pearson <daniel@privatesystems.net> wrote:

I'd like to see you tell the UK Government that they are going to pay 1 Euro per IP for a /8

Let me know how that conversation goes :)

On 4/16/24 9:20 AM, Petru Bunea wrote:

This is NOT a good example. In this example we see how a /22 allocation pays 1094 EUR per year, which is close to 1 EUR / 1 IP / Year, and a /8 allocation pays 48.000 EUR, which is 0.003 EURO / 1 IP / Year, which is 333 times less expensive. So tell me again how this is a good example. 

Thanks

On 16 Apr 2024, at 17:07, Firma KOMPEX <gabi@kompex.pl> wrote:

very good example Sebastian 

Others are doing it and Europe should too 

We should be pioneers and we are in the Middle Ages.
We are chipping away at such obvious issues from others.

The fixed fee for the LIR Account + the resource fee can stay 
they need to be calculated 

But necessarily, as you pointed out, IP usage should be accounted for


Pozdrawiam
Gabriel Sulka

-------------------------------------------------------------
Firma Handlowo - Usługowa KOMPEX
34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A
tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00
www.kompex.pl ; bok@kompex.pl ; kompex@nowytarg.net

-----Original Message-----
From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of
Sebastien Brossier
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 3:51 PM
To: members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: [members-discuss] Charging scheme 2025 proposal (logarithmic)

Hello all,

I propose to add the following model to the charging scheme 2025 voting
options.


*1 - Introduction:*

This charging scheme is heavily inspired by APNIC. If you are not 
familiar with this, you can see an example here:
https://www.apnic.net/get-ip/apnic-membership/how-much-does-it-cost/member-f
ees-calculator/

The main idea is that each LIR pays according to its resources, but not 
linearly. You don't pay twice as much because you have twice as much 
resources.
The resulting fees are similar to what the other RIRs are charging, with 
infinite granularity (no categories).

It can be easily tweaked to reach any desired budget, and will remain 
viable when IPv4 has disappeared.

I have made IPv6 less punitive compared to APNIC, because RIPE has 
larger initial allocations.

Independent resources fees, sign-up fee, lack of ASN fee, remain as 
before in this proposal. I believe it is better to have a separate 
debate on these subjects at a later time.

The goal of this charging scheme is to lower the cost for members with a 
very low amount of resources, in order to attract newcomers and retain 
existing members. This way the RIPE NCC membership will remain numerous 
and diverse.


*2 - Charging scheme:*

(Warning: math incoming !)

IPv4_count = number of IPv4 addresses allocated
             (excluding independent assignments and legacy)
IPv6_count = number of IPv6 /56 subnets allocated
             (excluding independent assignments)

Base_Fee = 638 EUR
Bit_Factor = 1.31
Minimum_Fee = 500 EUR
Offset_IPv4 = 8
Offset_IPv6 = 24

IPv4_Fee = Base_Fee * Bit_Factor^(log2(IPv4_count) - Offset_IPv4)
IPv6_Fee = Base_Fee * Bit_Factor^(log2(IPv6_count) - Offset_IPv6)

Fee = max(IPv4_Fee, IPv6_Fee, Minimum_Fee)
        + 50 EUR per independent resource (excluding ASN)

My simulation, based on public data (2024-03-28), results in an average 
fee of 1900 EUR per LIR (+ 50 EUR per independent resource), so it 
should provide the same budget as the other options.
If RIPE NCC find different results with their simulation, they can 
adjust Base_Fee.


*3 - Examples:*

50 EUR per independent resource should be added to all these fees.

No allocations:   500 EUR
IPv4 /24 and/or IPv6 /32:    638 EUR
IPv4 /23 and/or IPv6 /31:    835 EUR
IPv4 /22 and/or IPv6 /30:   1094 EUR
IPv4 /21 and/or IPv6 /29:   1434 EUR
IPv4 /20 and/or IPv6 /28:   1878 EUR
IPv4 /19 and/or IPv6 /27:   2461 EUR
IPv4 /18 and/or IPv6 /26:   3224 EUR
IPv4 /17 and/or IPv6 /25:   4223 EUR
IPv4 /16 and/or IPv6 /24:   5533 EUR
IPv4 /15 and/or IPv6 /23:   7248 EUR
IPv4 /14 and/or IPv6 /22:   9495 EUR
IPv4 /13 and/or IPv6 /21:  12439 EUR
IPv4 /12 and/or IPv6 /20:  16295 EUR
IPv4 /11 and/or IPv6 /19:  21347 EUR
IPv4 /10 and/or IPv6 /18:  27965 EUR
IPv4 /9 and/or IPv6 /17:  36634 EUR
IPv4 /8 and/or IPv6 /16:  47991 EUR

Largest LIR is just below 60 kEUR.

There are no categories, so your fee can be somewhere between these numbers.

If you think the fees are too high, I invite you to read the fee 
schedule of the other RIRs.


Thank you if you've read this far.


Best regards,
Sebastien Brossier

_______________________________________________
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/gabi%40kompex.pl


_______________________________________________
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/suport%40bunea.eu

_______________________________________________
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/daniel%40privatesystems.net

_______________________________________________
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/suport%40bunea.eu

_______________________________________________
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/doru.serdin%40mediasat.ro