Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
We have a relatively small deployment with a single LIR, single ASN , two IPv4 allocations and one IPv6 allocation. Model 1 has me paying 28.2% more , €2,050 Model 2 has me paying 89.7% more.... €4,050 For a small provider.. that is a SIGNIFICANT price increase and burden for what is effectively a centralized database and verification service. For what exactly are you telling me I am paying for with those increases? Why has your budget grown to the point that you are worried about LIR accounts merging? Why are you not exploring other options by reducing your budget and being proper stewards of our money. Please do not forget that RIPE, as your own definition is a "We're a not-for-profit membership association, a Regional Internet Registry and the secretariat for the RIPE community supporting the Internet through technical coordination." You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall? Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall. Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat? Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created. You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives. The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel. Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~ On 3/7/23 03:35, Simon Jan Haytink wrote:
Dear RIPE NCC members,
We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023.
In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers.
The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership.
One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members.
To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as:
Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model.
You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/mem...
We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years.
I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss@ripe.net) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM.
The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations
I look forward to your input.
Kind regards,
Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC
Summary
7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023
References
Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-cha...
Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentation...
Daniel, The new proposed pricing model 2 is fair. Hoarders of IPv4 aren't going to like the new model. I encourage every LIR to vote on the upcoming change when requested! This is THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE in recent times and may actually solve the IPv4 shortage in the EU. Your AS63410 currently announce 67,072 IPv4 addresses registered to your entity PrivateSystems Networks. If you can't afford 4,050 euros per year, it's time to recycle some IP addresses back to RIPE. Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd On 08/03/2023 13:14, Daniel Pearson wrote:
We have a relatively small deployment with a single LIR, single ASN , two IPv4 allocations and one IPv6 allocation.
Model 1 has me paying 28.2% more , €2,050 Model 2 has me paying 89.7% more.... €4,050
For a small provider.. that is a SIGNIFICANT price increase and burden for what is effectively a centralized database and verification service.
For what exactly are you telling me I am paying for with those increases?
Why has your budget grown to the point that you are worried about LIR accounts merging? Why are you not exploring other options by reducing your budget and being proper stewards of our money. Please do not forget that RIPE, as your own definition is a "We're a not-for-profit membership association, a Regional Internet Registry and the secretariat for the RIPE community supporting the Internet through technical coordination."
You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall?
Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall.
Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat?
Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created.
You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives.
The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel.
Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~
On 3/7/23 03:35, Simon Jan Haytink wrote:
Dear RIPE NCC members,
We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023.
In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers.
The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership.
One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members.
To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as:
Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model.
You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/mem... We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years.
I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list ( members-discuss@ripe.net ) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM.
The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations I look forward to your input.
Kind regards,
Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC
Summary
7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023
References
Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-cha... Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentation...
Hi Josh, Thanks for your reply. It's not about being able to afford or not afford this for us, it's the simple fact that I do not believe RIPE has its members best interest at heart with this change. * RIPE does not need 190 employees. * RIPE does not need to 'contribute' millions to other ventures * RIPE does not need to budget 579 'trips' in a single year. * RIPE does not need to budget almost 3 million for "PR". RIPE is a monopoly, it has NO competition in the regions it operates, why does it need PR? The fact remains that RIPE is a member governed non profit which we all have a say in how it operates. I fully disagree that RIPE needs to raise their fee's like this to continue operating properly. You are correct, this is a very important VOTE and membership should do just that, and send a clear message to the board that we will not tolerate irrelevant waste of our money. Daniel~ On 3/8/23 11:41, Josh Jameson wrote:
Daniel,
The new proposed pricing model 2 is fair. Hoarders of IPv4 aren't going to like the new model. I encourage every LIR to vote on the upcoming change when requested! This is *THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE* in recent times and may actually solve the IPv4 shortage in the EU.
Your AS63410 currently announce 67,072 IPv4 addresses registered to your entity PrivateSystems Networks. If you can't afford 4,050 euros per year, it's time to recycle some IP addresses back to RIPE.
Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd
On 08/03/2023 13:14, Daniel Pearson wrote:
We have a relatively small deployment with a single LIR, single ASN , two IPv4 allocations and one IPv6 allocation.
Model 1 has me paying 28.2% more , €2,050 Model 2 has me paying 89.7% more.... €4,050
For a small provider.. that is a SIGNIFICANT price increase and burden for what is effectively a centralized database and verification service.
For what exactly are you telling me I am paying for with those increases?
Why has your budget grown to the point that you are worried about LIR accounts merging? Why are you not exploring other options by reducing your budget and being proper stewards of our money. Please do not forget that RIPE, as your own definition is a "We're a not-for-profit membership association, a Regional Internet Registry and the secretariat for the RIPE community supporting the Internet through technical coordination."
You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall?
Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall.
Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat?
Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created.
You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives.
The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel.
Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~
On 3/7/23 03:35, Simon Jan Haytink wrote:
Dear RIPE NCC members,
We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023.
In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers.
The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership.
One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members.
To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as:
Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model.
You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/mem...
We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years.
I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss@ripe.net) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM.
The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations
I look forward to your input.
Kind regards,
Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC
Summary
7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023
References
Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-cha...
Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentation...
_______________________________________________ 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%40privatesyste...
Hi Daniel, I agree with all your points and it does concern me. We have more LIRs than ever and no new IPv4 to hand out, so why are RIPE NCC's expenses getting out of control? Perhaps it would be in the best interest of RIPE to not hand out millions to other ventures if you can't even meet your own budget. Membership for us for the past few years cost; 2016: 2,100 2017: 1,575 2018: 1,040 2019: 832 2020: 1,046 2021: 939 2022: 786 2023: 1,541 2024: 2,100 (Model 1) What the hell happened for us to get back to 2016 pricing!? It seems RIPE is completely mismanaged. In 2016 there were ~13,000 LIRs. In 2023 there are ~23,000 LIRs. The only thing that has changed is their growth has HALTED because we ran out of IPv4. Why the hell is RIPE being run like a for-profit and why do they need "investments"? However, it doesn't excuse large members who will be paying a capped 8,000/yr for literally millions of IPv4. It's still completely unfair IMHO. I believe in equal opportunity and it's impossible for new LIRs to get IPv4 unless you pay stupid amounts leasing the addresses or buying them outright as a transfer. How many of you Category 5 members can honestly hold your hand up and say you're low on IPv4 space, AND can't afford to contribute 8,000 per year? That's complete nonsense. Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd On 09/03/2023 12:13, Daniel Pearson wrote:
Hi Josh,
Thanks for your reply. It's not about being able to afford or not afford this for us, it's the simple fact that I do not believe RIPE has its members best interest at heart with this change.
- RIPE does not need 190 employees. - RIPE does not need to 'contribute' millions to other ventures - RIPE does not need to budget 579 'trips' in a single year. - RIPE does not need to budget almost 3 million for "PR". RIPE is a monopoly, it has NO competition in the regions it operates, why does it need PR?
The fact remains that RIPE is a member governed non profit which we all have a say in how it operates. I fully disagree that RIPE needs to raise their fee's like this to continue operating properly.
You are correct, this is a very important VOTE and membership should do just that, and send a clear message to the board that we will not tolerate irrelevant waste of our money.
Daniel~
On 3/8/23 11:41, Josh Jameson wrote:
Daniel,
The new proposed pricing model 2 is fair. Hoarders of IPv4 aren't going to like the new model. I encourage every LIR to vote on the upcoming change when requested! This is THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE in recent times and may actually solve the IPv4 shortage in the EU.
Your AS63410 currently announce 67,072 IPv4 addresses registered to your entity PrivateSystems Networks. If you can't afford 4,050 euros per year, it's time to recycle some IP addresses back to RIPE.
Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd
On 08/03/2023 13:14, Daniel Pearson wrote:
We have a relatively small deployment with a single LIR, single ASN , two IPv4 allocations and one IPv6 allocation.
Model 1 has me paying 28.2% more , €2,050 Model 2 has me paying 89.7% more.... €4,050
For a small provider.. that is a SIGNIFICANT price increase and burden for what is effectively a centralized database and verification service.
For what exactly are you telling me I am paying for with those increases?
Why has your budget grown to the point that you are worried about LIR accounts merging? Why are you not exploring other options by reducing your budget and being proper stewards of our money. Please do not forget that RIPE, as your own definition is a "We're a not-for-profit membership association, a Regional Internet Registry and the secretariat for the RIPE community supporting the Internet through technical coordination."
You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall?
Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall.
Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat?
Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created.
You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives.
The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel.
Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~
On 3/7/23 03:35, Simon Jan Haytink wrote:
Dear RIPE NCC members,
We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023.
In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers.
The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership.
One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members.
To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as:
Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model.
You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/mem... We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years.
I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list ( members-discuss@ripe.net ) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM.
The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations I look forward to your input.
Kind regards,
Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC
Summary
7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023
References
Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-cha... Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentation...
_______________________________________________ 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%40privatesyste...
Hi Josh, Thanks for your reply, I agree it is very concerning with the budget increases that RIPE continues to give its self. So my only counter point to your assertion regarding Category 5 members would be that IP addresses themselves are not supposed to be viewed as tangible owned objects. While I am summarizing things and may not be entirely accurate, I'll give my thoughts. RIR's walk a tight rope on how IP addresses are classified. In the days of old, legacy blocks, which many of the large IPv4 holders still have, are contractually and legally theirs just like any other real property, they own them. Those individuals are becoming a member of a registry to have a place to record their usage so that the rest of the world continues to acknowledge those blocks and route that traffic. When things changed, legacy blocks went away and we began to shift towards the newer structure we have today, which is a very careful balance on how to categorize IPv4 assets. I would be concerned that if RIPE began to specifically charge per block assigned, that they may inadvertently imply or grant more or less ownership rights over those blocks by doing so and could have quite a few unintended consequences. With that said, if RIPE would right size their budget, and stop wasting millions of dollars, I don't see any reason why we could not return to 2019 levels for all members involved. Daniel~ On 3/9/23 09:16, Josh Jameson wrote:
Hi Daniel,
I agree with all your points and it does concern me. We have more LIRs than ever and no new IPv4 to hand out, so why are RIPE NCC's expenses getting out of control?
Perhaps it would be in the best interest of RIPE to not hand out millions to other ventures if you can't even meet your own budget.
Membership for us for the past few years cost; 2016: 2,100 2017: 1,575 2018: 1,040 2019: 832 2020: 1,046 2021: 939 2022: 786 2023: 1,541 2024: 2,100 (Model 1)
What the hell happened for us to get back to 2016 pricing!? It seems RIPE is completely mismanaged.
In 2016 there were ~13,000 LIRs. In 2023 there are ~23,000 LIRs.
The only thing that has changed is their growth has HALTED because we ran out of IPv4. Why the hell is RIPE being run like a for-profit and why do they need "investments"?
However, it doesn't excuse large members who will be paying a capped 8,000/yr for literally millions of IPv4. It's still completely unfair IMHO. I believe in equal opportunity and it's impossible for new LIRs to get IPv4 unless you pay stupid amounts leasing the addresses or buying them outright as a transfer.
How many of you Category 5 members can honestly hold your hand up and say you're*low on IPv4 space, AND can't afford to contribute 8,000 per year? _That's complete nonsense._*
Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd
On 09/03/2023 12:13, Daniel Pearson wrote:
Hi Josh,
Thanks for your reply. It's not about being able to afford or not afford this for us, it's the simple fact that I do not believe RIPE has its members best interest at heart with this change.
* RIPE does not need 190 employees. * RIPE does not need to 'contribute' millions to other ventures * RIPE does not need to budget 579 'trips' in a single year. * RIPE does not need to budget almost 3 million for "PR". RIPE is a monopoly, it has NO competition in the regions it operates, why does it need PR?
The fact remains that RIPE is a member governed non profit which we all have a say in how it operates. I fully disagree that RIPE needs to raise their fee's like this to continue operating properly.
You are correct, this is a very important VOTE and membership should do just that, and send a clear message to the board that we will not tolerate irrelevant waste of our money.
Daniel~
On 3/8/23 11:41, Josh Jameson wrote:
Daniel,
The new proposed pricing model 2 is fair. Hoarders of IPv4 aren't going to like the new model. I encourage every LIR to vote on the upcoming change when requested! This is *THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE* in recent times and may actually solve the IPv4 shortage in the EU.
Your AS63410 currently announce 67,072 IPv4 addresses registered to your entity PrivateSystems Networks. If you can't afford 4,050 euros per year, it's time to recycle some IP addresses back to RIPE.
Regards, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Ltd
On 08/03/2023 13:14, Daniel Pearson wrote:
We have a relatively small deployment with a single LIR, single ASN , two IPv4 allocations and one IPv6 allocation.
Model 1 has me paying 28.2% more , €2,050 Model 2 has me paying 89.7% more.... €4,050
For a small provider.. that is a SIGNIFICANT price increase and burden for what is effectively a centralized database and verification service.
For what exactly are you telling me I am paying for with those increases?
Why has your budget grown to the point that you are worried about LIR accounts merging? Why are you not exploring other options by reducing your budget and being proper stewards of our money. Please do not forget that RIPE, as your own definition is a "We're a not-for-profit membership association, a Regional Internet Registry and the secretariat for the RIPE community supporting the Internet through technical coordination."
You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall?
Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall.
Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat?
Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created.
You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives.
The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel.
Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~
On 3/7/23 03:35, Simon Jan Haytink wrote:
Dear RIPE NCC members,
We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023.
In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers.
The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership.
One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members.
To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as:
Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions.
In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model.
You can download the Excel sheet from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/mem...
We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years.
I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss@ripe.net) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM.
The consultation will also be recorded and available from: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations
I look forward to your input.
Kind regards,
Simon Jan Haytink Finance Director RIPE NCC
Summary
7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023
References
Open House and Survey Results https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-cha...
Presentation at General Meeting https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentation...
_______________________________________________ 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%40privatesyste...
_______________________________________________ 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%40privatesyste...
On 08/03/2023 15:14, Daniel Pearson wrote:
You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall?
Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall.
Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat?
Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created.
You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives.
The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel.
Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~
Yet another well written and detailed response that I totally agree with. Where I have worked in previous years, when there is a budget shortfall, trips are curtailed, salaries are frozen and expansion projects are cancelled. I think RIPE needs to change its mindset and remember it is a non-profit and can't keep raising membership fees for all its grand projects. Regards, Hank
I fully agree with your thought Hank, What are the justification for RIPE pricing raise? Sincerely, Customer Support ATTENZIONE - Questo messaggio contiene informazioni che possono essere privilegiate o riservate ed è di proprietà di C1V di Cinzia Tocci. È inteso solo per la persona a cui è indirizzato. Se non sei il destinatario previsto, non sei autorizzato a leggere, stampare e copiare, diffondere, distribuire, conservare o utilizzare questo messaggio o parte di esso. Se hai ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, avvisa immediatamente il mittente ed elimina tutte le copie di questo messaggio. Ogni informazione è strettamente confidenziale. Qualsiasi diffusione delle informazioni contenute all’interno sarà punita secondo le normative competenti.
On 9 Mar 2023, at 14:28, Hank Nussbacher <hank@interall.co.il> wrote:
On 08/03/2023 15:14, Daniel Pearson wrote:
You are not for profit, and as such I would recommend instead of increasing the LIR pricing, we acknowledge that the world is a much tougher place and review not only the budget expenses of the organization but additional expenses that are not necessary. You're offering up to €250,000 per year funding projects with presumably our registration fee's and funds of which you selected 8 recipients, for a presumed funding of €2,000,000 of our funds..... If that program was cut or reduced, how much would that make up for your budget short fall? Otherwise how about we also investigate other avenues of budget expenditure from RIPE and determine your total projected short fall. Ripe appears to have Approx 190 Employees on payroll as well, but yet RIPE only has 23,397 LIR's and 20,244 members. That is a significantly high ratio of employee to members, - 106 Members per 1 employee - why is this so high, what audits have been conducted recently to ensure RIPE is not suffering from technical creep and employee bloat? Your own budget for 2023 shows you've assigned less IPv4 resources in 2021 and 2022 than in prior years and have completed significantly fewer registry checks. The only real increase seen has been in RPKI's created. You're also projecting more trips this year than previous as well, a 10% increase. I'm sorry but this feels like a huge cash grab to maintain your current life style and I fully reject both Models. If I have more time I'll continue to dig into your financials and we can all have discussions on how as an organization you can be better stewards of our Money. You have to remember, at the end of the day your job is to manage a registry of finite resources. Spending money on events, trade shows, travel and excess employees is not a necessity to conduct your original goals and objectives. The rest of the world, and all of the small companies who utilize your services often times do not have the liberty to simply talk about raising prices, especially in many of the economically impacted areas that RIPE services. RIPE should follow the same course of action as many of their customers do, evaluate internal expenditures and operate within the budget provided by your members, not come to the membership and request we continue to pay for donations to random projects, or a 10% increase in employee travel. Sincerely Daniel C Pearson Private Systems Networks~
Yet another well written and detailed response that I totally agree with. Where I have worked in previous years, when there is a budget shortfall, trips are curtailed, salaries are frozen and expansion projects are cancelled. I think RIPE needs to change its mindset and remember it is a non-profit and can't keep raising membership fees for all its grand projects.
Regards, Hank
_______________________________________________ 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/support%40c1vhosting....
Am Mittwoch, 8. März 2023, 14:14:02 CET schrieb Daniel Pearson:
We have a relatively small deployment with a single LIR, single ASN , two IPv4 allocations and one IPv6 allocation.
This seems to be a typical smaller company LIR setup like (hopefully) many still existing.
Model 1 has me paying 28.2% more , €2,050 Model 2 has me paying 89.7% more.... €4,050
For a small provider.. that is a SIGNIFICANT price increase and burden for what is effectively a centralized database and verification service.
For what exactly are you telling me I am paying for with those increases?
We fully support the whole statement too. and: If RIPE want's to succeed and survive as a truely independent, non-gov non- commercial organisation for a broad internet community, then rising the financial entry hurds leads to the exact opposite. After some years of probably unexpected high cash flows every organisation and company tends to collect "bacon fat" which get's in the way when normal times return. many thanks. best regards, niels. -- --- Niels Dettenbach Syndicat IT & Internet https://www.syndicat.com PGP: https://syndicat.com/pub_key.asc ---
Good afternoon, my fellow members! I represent Hostmaster LLC, a Ukrainian domain registry. We are operating in Ukraine and abroad, using dedicated servers to support our infrastructure. We are 21 years old. Back in 2001, we self-funded our operations, and never took a loan or donation. Resource-wise, we have got our /21 PA, our pre-runout /21, two /24 PI of 20th century style IP blocks (those were our start-up resources), and /48 and /32 of contemporary century IP, plus two AS numbers; we also sponsor a couple of small projects with their small allocations. Both proposed schemes would raise our fees, to exactly the same 2200 EUR. While we can afford them I cannot consider our organization large. Since the latest escalation of the bloody war by the russian federation in 2022 we have had to double our network footprint to be disaster-proof. We aren't making more money either as currency had lost 25% to the euro. We had to spend some money on generator fuel for our office and high-capacity batteries for staff and to shut down equipment in cities under enemy fire. I can imagine many Ukrainian ISPs, hosting, and cloud providers in a similar situation, or a company in Turkey can be similarly affected by currency depreciation. Speaking of the second option, consider an idea of a "variable" ipv4 charge to be impossible to implement correctly. With a cap we are giving an advantage to large organizations; without it, we may risk some of them going to migrate to other RIRs thus significantly impacting NCC revenue. We had decided this once; we seek ipv6 adoption making everyone request appropriate block at once; what going back in time is going to do? If we are so concerned about merging extra LIR accounts we can make it cost more. I propose to vote no on both options, thus keeping the current flat fee while adjusting it as the economic situation changes. I am also specifically against: 1. including sponsored resources into category sizing while charging for them by their count, as it is double dipping into member pockets; 2. charging for AS number, own or sponsored, as those are plentiful; 3. making use of IPv6 charging categories, for the next decade, as we are still dealing with dual stack world. ARIN made the mistake of charging more for dual-stack members, thus discouraging IPv6 adoption; they later "fixed" it by allowing cheaper /36 allocations; 4. making any fees for changing a sponsor (I am thinking of everything a fee can be added to, possibly.) Looking at the proposed budget of 40 million euros and way over twenty thousand LIR accounts (forecasting a 10% drop of them due to mergers and some reserve for non-paying members) an equal member fee would be under 2000€. The vast reserves of NCC should allow for softening the blow of the economic downturn, and dozens of proposed cost-cutting measures (staff headcount, office location, travel, donations to external parties, free member events, and others.) I also see a meeting fee is up 14% already. assuming some people only get reimbursed after the trip happens, and a lot of attendees not paying their bill two months earlier. May I suggest an NCC tip field instead on the annual invoice: this would allow members who feel they benefit a lot but pay too little to contribute more but on their own will. On a serious note I would like us all to come to agreement on a formula that is just and fair. Judging on amount of critique on the list, we do not have this, yet. -- dk@hostmaster.ua
Good day, colleagues. I also did not understand how to correctly perform the calculation for our LIR. We have few resources of our own, but we are a sponsor for several dozen objects. How is the calculation performed in this case? 16.03.2023 16:06, Dmitry Kohmanyuk пише:
Good afternoon, my fellow members!
I represent Hostmaster LLC, a Ukrainian domain registry. We are operating in Ukraine and abroad, using dedicated servers to support our infrastructure. We are 21 years old. Back in 2001, we self-funded our operations, and never took a loan or donation.Resource-wise, we have got our /21 PA, our pre-runout /21, two /24 PI of 20th century style IP blocks (those were our start-up resources), and /48 and /32 of contemporary century IP, plus two AS numbers; we also sponsor a couple of small projects with their small allocations.
Both proposed schemes would raise our fees, to exactly the same 2200 EUR.While we can afford them I cannot consider our organization large.Since the latest escalation of the bloody war by the russian federation in 2022 we have had to double our network footprint to be disaster-proof. We aren't making more money either as currency had lost 25% to the euro. We had to spend some money on generator fuel for our office and high-capacity batteries for staff and to shut down equipment in cities under enemy fire.
I can imagine many Ukrainian ISPs, hosting, and cloud providers in a similar situation, or a company in Turkey can be similarly affected by currency depreciation.
Speaking of the second option, consider an idea of a "variable" ipv4 charge to be impossible to implement correctly.With a cap we are giving an advantage to large organizations; without it, we may risk some of them going to migrate to other RIRs thus significantly impacting NCC revenue. We had decided this once; we seek ipv6 adoption making everyone request appropriate block at once; what going back in time is going to do? If we are so concerned about merging extra LIR accounts we can make it cost more.
I propose to vote no on both options, thus keeping the current flat fee while adjusting it as the economic situation changes.
I am also specifically against:
1. including sponsored resources into category sizing while charging for them by their count, as it is double dipping into member pockets; 2. charging for AS number, own or sponsored, as those are plentiful; 3. making use of IPv6 charging categories, for the next decade, as we are still dealing with dual stack world. ARIN made the mistake of charging more for dual-stack members, thus discouraging IPv6 adoption; they later "fixed" it by allowing cheaper /36 allocations; 4. making any fees for changing a sponsor (I am thinking of everything a fee can be added to, possibly.)
Looking at the proposed budget of 40 million euros and way over twenty thousand LIR accounts (forecasting a 10% drop of them due to mergers and some reserve for non-paying members) an equal member fee would be under 2000€. The vast reserves of NCC should allow for softening the blow of the economic downturn, and dozens of proposed cost-cutting measures (staff headcount, office location, travel, donations to external parties, free member events, and others.)
I also see a meeting fee is up 14% already.
assuming some people only get reimbursed after the trip happens, and a lot of attendees not paying their bill two months earlier.
May I suggest an NCC tip field instead on the annual invoice: this would allow members who feel they benefit a lot but pay too little to contribute more but on their own will.
On a serious note I would like us all to come to agreement on a formula that is just and fair. Judging on amount of critique on the list, we do not have this, yet.
-- dk@hostmaster.ua
_______________________________________________ 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/o.zinkov%40kyivlink.c...
-- ---------------------- https://kyivlink.com https://t.me/kyivlink https://fb.com/kyivlink https://instagram.com/kyivlink 044 332 9555 093 332 9555
Hello Everyone, Model 1 is somehow straight forward, and the increase is minor; however, Model 2 is not clear. I simulated multiple inputs, an LIR having a single /19 and a single /17 will be in category 5 and treated the same as someone having 8*/19 and 8*/17, even with a /8. I believe Model 2 is not fair at all and it must be re-adjusted so we can evaluate both models properly. Regards Adnan From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Oleg Zinkov via members-discuss Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2023 10:05 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 CAUTION: This message originated outside of Zain. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good day, colleagues. I also did not understand how to correctly perform the calculation for our LIR. We have few resources of our own, but we are a sponsor for several dozen objects. How is the calculation performed in this case? 16.03.2023 16:06, Dmitry Kohmanyuk пише: Good afternoon, my fellow members! I represent Hostmaster LLC, a Ukrainian domain registry. We are operating in Ukraine and abroad, using dedicated servers to support our infrastructure. We are 21 years old. Back in 2001, we self-funded our operations, and never took a loan or donation. Resource-wise, we have got our /21 PA, our pre-runout /21, two /24 PI of 20th century style IP blocks (those were our start-up resources), and /48 and /32 of contemporary century IP, plus two AS numbers; we also sponsor a couple of small projects with their small allocations. Both proposed schemes would raise our fees, to exactly the same 2200 EUR. While we can afford them I cannot consider our organization large. Since the latest escalation of the bloody war by the russian federation in 2022 we have had to double our network footprint to be disaster-proof. We aren't making more money either as currency had lost 25% to the euro. We had to spend some money on generator fuel for our office and high-capacity batteries for staff and to shut down equipment in cities under enemy fire. I can imagine many Ukrainian ISPs, hosting, and cloud providers in a similar situation, or a company in Turkey can be similarly affected by currency depreciation. Speaking of the second option, consider an idea of a "variable" ipv4 charge to be impossible to implement correctly. With a cap we are giving an advantage to large organizations; without it, we may risk some of them going to migrate to other RIRs thus significantly impacting NCC revenue. We had decided this once; we seek ipv6 adoption making everyone request appropriate block at once; what going back in time is going to do? If we are so concerned about merging extra LIR accounts we can make it cost more. I propose to vote no on both options, thus keeping the current flat fee while adjusting it as the economic situation changes. I am also specifically against: 1. including sponsored resources into category sizing while charging for them by their count, as it is double dipping into member pockets; 2. charging for AS number, own or sponsored, as those are plentiful; 3. making use of IPv6 charging categories, for the next decade, as we are still dealing with dual stack world. ARIN made the mistake of charging more for dual-stack members, thus discouraging IPv6 adoption; they later "fixed" it by allowing cheaper /36 allocations; 4. making any fees for changing a sponsor (I am thinking of everything a fee can be added to, possibly.) Looking at the proposed budget of 40 million euros and way over twenty thousand LIR accounts (forecasting a 10% drop of them due to mergers and some reserve for non-paying members) an equal member fee would be under 2000€. The vast reserves of NCC should allow for softening the blow of the economic downturn, and dozens of proposed cost-cutting measures (staff headcount, office location, travel, donations to external parties, free member events, and others.) I also see a meeting fee is up 14% already. assuming some people only get reimbursed after the trip happens, and a lot of attendees not paying their bill two months earlier. May I suggest an NCC tip field instead on the annual invoice: this would allow members who feel they benefit a lot but pay too little to contribute more but on their own will. On a serious note I would like us all to come to agreement on a formula that is just and fair. Judging on amount of critique on the list, we do not have this, yet. -- dk@hostmaster.ua<mailto:dk@hostmaster.ua> _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/o.zinkov%40kyivlink.c... -- ---------------------- https://kyivlink.com https://t.me/kyivlink https://fb.com/kyivlink https://instagram.com/kyivlink 044 332 9555 093 332 9555 ________________________________ Disclaimer This communication is intended for the above named person and is confidential and / or legally privileged. Any opinion(s) expressed in this communication are not necessarily those of Zain. If it has come to you in error you must take no action based upon it, nor must you print it, copy it, forward it, or show it to anyone. Please delete and destroy the e-mail and any attachments and inform the sender immediately. Thank you. Zain is not responsible for the political, religious, racial or partisan opinion in any correspondence conducted by its domain users. Therefore, any such opinion expressed, whether explicitly or implicitly, in any said correspondence is not to be interpreted as that of Zain. Zain may monitor all incoming and outgoing e-mails in line with Zain business practice. Although Zain has taken steps to ensure that e-mails and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that, in keeping with best business practice, the recipient must ensure they are actually virus free.
participants (9)
-
Adnan Al Khatib -
Customer Support -
Daniel Pearson -
Dmitry Kohmanyuk -
Hank Nussbacher -
Josh Jameson -
Niels Dettenbach -
Oleg Zinkov -
ripe-ncc-members-discuss＠itns.md