On 19/01/2026 15:32:29, "Ben Cartwright-Cox via members-discuss" <members-discuss@ripe.net> wrote:
...huge IPv4 estates like Orange and Deutsche Telekom pay some incredibly high amount) is (counterintuitively) probably not an ideal situation, as any serious changes in such customers can have a pretty big impact on the overall income of RIPE NCC.
Many reasons not to charge large orgs have been given by people who are not the large orgs. Let them defend themselves and tell us why they should pay proportionately less. I’d like to hear what the real choices are here. They may say "actually we have so many v4 we rent them out at EU1/month each so 10% to RIPE for the benefit of getting to make out like bandits on a public resource is a pretty good deal”
Having whale customers is good for some people/businesses however it can be a bit of a liability (to put it lightly) when one of those customers decides to leave,
We are only risking their current fee, not the potential larger fee, why discount ever getting a large fee and so asking other smaller orgs to pay a part of that large fee for them?
I would rather have a large population of companies paying the bill then a smaller pool of whale companies that could destabilise the org by leaving.
False dichotomy. There are not many of them, RIPE will lose more members to run out period LIRs cashing out their winnings. We are not voting on a forever scheme, if a few large paying memebers were to leave then we can change the model again to ensure the budget remains the same if we want that, and that fees per member do not become onerous. If we are voting for a forever scheme then the only safe choice is the current flat fee, it works no matter how many leave and at some point we will change the budget to keep the fee reasonable. To be clear, flat fee must remain a voting option each year.
I'm all up for stuff getting cheaper, but not if that causes stuff to not exist for the long term
I’d rather not pay more forever because I fear maybe paying a little more later. brandon