On Jul 25, 2012, at 9:22 AM, hostmaster@freethought-internet.co.uk wrote:
The scoring units increase with the number of IP addresses in an allocation, so someone with a /20 allocated in 2012 has a score double that of someone with a /21 allocated in 2012 (40 and 20 respectively). There is a clear emphasis on the size of resources allocated.
Hard to confront facts with misinformation :) Facts remain: - The charging scheme has always been based on resource usage without affecting the non-profit status - A lot of people thinks that the way to go should be to base it MORE on the resource usage - The current proposal goes in the opposite direction, will make small LIRs pay more and large LIRs pay even less - The tax thing is misinformation and is being used as an excuse. Is there a way in RIPE rules so that a group of LIRs can prepare a different proposal and ask for it to be voted upon ? Regards, A.