Hello Dears,
I totally Agree with ULF , and I suggest to charge a very high fees for the IPv4 subnets that’s not utilizing ( let us say 50% or more) . This will help Ripe
to get back unused subnets.
BR,
Aladdin Hakim
Data Network Manager
P.O. Box 4850 Amman 11953 Jordan
Al Madina Al Munawara St., Jad Centre, 2nd Floor
Tel: +962 6 5777733 Fax: +962 6 5777744
( New) Cell:
+962 7 88 06 00 69 Email:
ahakim@damamax.jo
From: members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net]
On Behalf Of Cenk Keylan
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:57 AM
To: Ulf Kieber; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] A Whim about next year's fees
Hi Ulf,
As IP4 is limited resource sure it must have a fee, else how will the new commers can access to the IP4 while the large ISP’s have millions of unused
IP addresses which they have got from Ripe years ago. As a simple argument, we have an ISP in Turkey which even their license is taken back and they have 100K times more IP addresses then we have and nobody is asking tem to give the IP addresses back and they
are keeping the IP4 block as the fee they pay for membership is not important then the IP4 block they are keeping in hand.
Have a nice day,
Cenk Keylan
|
From: members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net]
On Behalf Of Ulf Kieber
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:47 AM
To: members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] A Whim about next year's fees
Have a look at
http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/resource-management/faq/faq-general-resources
“IP addresses are a shared public resource and are not for sale.”
The fee you pay is not a fee for IP addresses, but a fee for supplied registration services by the RIPE NCC.
Please also remember that by making an IP address an accountable ressources and sticking a price tag onto it, taxability in the Netherlands will change, yielding
an approx. 25% increase in taxes (and fees).
Since I’m a little bit fed up with this discussion now I hereby request to make the fee a real membership fee for the RIPE association; one member, one fee;
budget divided by the number of members.
Best regards,
Ulf Kieber
Head of NOC
green.ch AG
From:
members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net
[mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net]
On Behalf Of KOSMOZZ - Info
Sent: Montag, 13. Februar 2012 19:26
To: Lu Heng; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] A Whim about next year's fees
Hi Lu,
I was thinking the same. Why shouldn’t we all be billed for the amount we are using and may’be pay a fee for the amount that has been reserved and not used?
I’ll take this with me to the Taskforce currently brainstorming on Billing matters.
Kind regards,
Filip Herman
KOSMOZZ
-- http://www.kosmozz.be
| Member of Internet Service Providers Belgium (http://www.ispa.be)
Van:
members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net
[mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net]
Namens Lu Heng
Verzonden: maandag 13 februari 2012 18:44
Aan: members-discuss@ripe.net
Onderwerp: [members-discuss] A Whim about next year's fees
Hi Colleagues:
Just had a whim about next year's membership fees, since Ripe will almost certain running out this year, why shouldn't we divided the membership fees as the percentage of the total recourse we have?(mostly IPv4)
The total amount of Ripe's IPv4 is known, and by end of this year, the total amount of each LIR's IPv4 is known as well.
So why should we just simpy do a math as LIR total amount address(L)/Ripe's total amount of address(R)*100%*Ripe's total need(TN)=Lir's yearly contribution(C)
So make the format simple:
C=(L/R*100%)*TN
Then I think it is "real fair". And as calculate the member fee based on the share of member in the organization's recourse's, it doesn't imply as "selling IP" rumor which has been the main reason we have categories rather
than real fair solutions.
How you think, my colleagues, and this is just my 2 cents thought.
--
--
Kind regards.
Lu
This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above.
It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use
of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the
intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and
e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this
message and including the text of the transmission received.