Pro or anti ipv6, it is surely not the job of RIPE to force its members to do anything they do not want to do by punative pricing. The job of RIPE is to serve its members. Simon Simon Talbot Chief Engineer Net Solutions Europe T: 020 3161 6001 F: 020 3161 6011 www.nse.co.uk The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments are private and confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the named addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you must not read, copy or use the information contained in any way. If you receive this email or any attachments in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and destroy any copy you have of it. We accept no responsibility for any loss or damages whatsoever arising in any way from receipt or use of this e-mail or any attachments. This e-mail is not intended to create legally binding commitments on our behalf, nor do its comments reflect our corporate views or policies. Net Solutions Europe Ltd Registered Office: Baxter House, 48 Church Road, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8RR Registered in England No. 03203624. -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss-admin@ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of DegNet GmbH - Hostmaster Sent: 08 August 2011 2:10 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Cc: Sven Olaf Kamphuis Subject: RE: [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote Saturday, August 06, 2011 3:14 PM
a flatrate billing model and ditching that 2007-01 policy would indeed, be preferred over more complex methods.
I would also prefer a Flatfee for every RIPE member including all services without any "discrimination" (like PI assignment fee, extra pricing for additional ASN, ...) in combination with a price per IPv4 address for LIRs holding more than /12 addresses. As extra large members control the core Internet infrastructure and do profit in a large scale from the current infrastructure these companies should have a strong motivation on putting forward the IPv6 deployment. The current charging scheme results in the opposite in my opinion: Large and extra large RIPE members currently do not seem to have any motivation to move forward to IPv6 as they currently benefit the most from the sneaking shortage of IPv4 resources on holding most of these (resources and reserves) by now. 40k or 0,00236...€ per IP (wiwi proposal) are less than peanuts for extra large companies. 0,02-0,05€ per IP for extra large members sounds more reasonable for me and should lead to a strong step toward IPv6, soon. The funds of this charge for extra large IPv4 resource holders could be spend purposive on IPv6 deployment. -Florian !����'����+yǢ��j)l~�&�� � )�����جr�,����x%��i��zZ �{hʋ�,�O��Z�� ���jw`��-�� ��ږ��zm����*颻Z���zw�� �z������)brJ'ح�"�Ej)l�w^�+����m�Lj)b������z������]��ޚ��i�kz�