----- Original Message -----

From: "Rob Golding" <rob.golding@othellotech.net> To: members-discuss@ripe.net Sent: Wednesday, 25 July, 2012 3:07:42 AM Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Charging scheme discussion

...

...

"count" of ip's within a block - no, it's back to them being a "commodity" (altering the tax status) This is wrong and leads to misinformation. Until last year RIPE membership had a cost depending on a class model (large, small, extra large, etc), which on its behalf depended on the number of allocated resources.

*number* of resources, not *size* of resources

So thank you for confirming my point:p

If the charging switches to per-IP then they become "product" or "stock" or "items" or similar, and have a value, and that WILL change the tax-status of RIPE - which at current levels, will mean 25% tax which *WILL* have to be taken from members in fees

So, hands up who wants a 25% price hike ?

Rob

No, there are five different billing categories for ranges of scores and each billing category has a price associated with it. The scores are calculated from a formula which includes the time of allocation relative to 1992 and the size of the allocation from a /19 to a /22 in IPv4 or a /30 to a /33 in IPv6. 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. Edward Dore Freethought Internet