Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
1 LIR = 1 Vote If you want 2 Votes, always can register other company as LIR. And you again will pay 1500 euro and have same resource limits (before next step up = +1500): 1 x /20 IPV4 block 1 x /29 IPV6 block 8 ASNs If we have more than 1 Vote for a LIR, based on the fee (fee: 4500, have 3 Votes), that will lead to monopol, mastodont companies will do what they want will vote and accept decisions only for their interests. And I can not call it democracy nor fair for all. Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Evgeniy Brodskiy wrote:
Confidential/?????????????
Hi Ivaylo, just to clarify, if some LIR pay for 2 chank of resource does it mean it has 2 votes ?? If contribution is not equal why votes should be equal ??
----------------- Best regards,
Evgeniy Brodskiy Kyivstar | Network engineer Kyiv, Ukraine
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of ivaylo Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 4:54 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
[????? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ????????? ?????????? ????? ??? ivaylo@bglans.net. ??????????, ???? ?? ???????: https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Every Year we talking same things and every year the result is zero...
Clearly it is not fair company which holds /22 IPV4 /32 IPV6 and few ASN to pay same amount as a company with /8 IPV4 /20 IPV6 and tens (if not hundreds) ASNs.
Clearly charging scheme based on the holded resource not accepting. Well then why not we think about hard coded resource limits for each member:
Annual fee of 1500 Euro per LIR gives : 1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32...) 8 x ASNs
If a LIR pass one or more of the above parameters the applied Annual fee +1500 Euro, so such LIR can hold and manage:
2 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum) 2 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum) 16 x ASN
If again pass one or more of these +1500 Euro and so on.
RIPE to send emails to each member with calculation for its next year fee, and with ask to free resources and return back to RIPE. Newly freed resources to be spread across members who not reach the first target (or at least to can ask for new resources without additional fee):
1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22 e.t.c.) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32... e.t.c) 8 x ASNs
To legacy resource holders to be given 1 year, to find sponsoring LIR, and their resources to be counted in the LIR account sum resources. Or to be asked to become LIRs, with 500 euro one pay joining fee.
This way RIPE can predict and calculate its bugdet much better.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Firma KOMPEX wrote:
Hi
it would be fair if the resource was not valued as a resource only as the number of IPs IP should be the basis for settlement - it is actually a cost there is a shortage of addresses, and some people have a lot of them unused and do not return them. If they paid for the addresses and it was a cost for them, they would wonder whether they really need them or whether it would be better to return some of them.
Pozdrawiam Gabriel Sulka
------------------------------------------------------------- Firma Handlowo - Us?ugowa KOMPEX 34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00 http://www.k/ ompex.pl%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0ba c9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6 38473209301289732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoi V2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vRog6oP4 cUl4jHHJwJtNmslrzbOIHlONn0zSTZyVOW8%3D&reserved=0 ; bok@kompex.pl ; kompex@nowytarg.net
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:49 PM To: domain@wkey.it Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote:
My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional resources a company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time of joining Ripe.
... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards. Back then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP...
So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already).
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvgen iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638473209301298466%7CUnknown%7CTW FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6 Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zGN5MtVkwMRKjIKh8U8zUxrmFFkQrZJ4eiuEv%2B RKwu8%3D&reserved=0 Unsubscribe: https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fivaylo%2540bglans.n et&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e230 1e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6384732093 01303571%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiL CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p4kryouKS1u%2F%2F mNi3sDc3friXMlh5MIiUrR8nVxR5m0%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________ 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/registry%40kyivstar.n...
Is this discussion about RIPE fee plans or about IPv4 usage? That’s 2 different questions :-) My opinion both can be solved by fee identical to the number v4 in use, for example 1 USD year per /32 address. If someone (presumably big company) wants to keep their bag of /8’s - they should be actually using them. When IP is in use that’s fair to assume it’s generating income and that 1 USD per used address is not a problem at all. And if someone wants just to keep big subnet because it was given to them on early days of internet - this will become indeed expensive and it will motivate to return/sell some. Outcome 1: small eyeball networks will be able to get at least /24 without astronomical investment and/or 2 year wait and pay just 254 USD for account. Outcome 2: Big ISPs and companies will pay significantly larger fee (yet literally nothing for them) and RIPE income will be much bigger. Addresses is not asset which should be kept and accounted in company “balance”. Policy always assumed fair *use*, not fair *keep*. Same way domains require small fee per each making keeping thousands not in use a bit expensive.
On 29 Mar 2024, at 20:05, ivaylo <ivaylo@bglans.net> wrote:
1 LIR = 1 Vote
If you want 2 Votes, always can register other company as LIR. And you again will pay 1500 euro and have same resource limits (before next step up = +1500):
1 x /20 IPV4 block 1 x /29 IPV6 block 8 ASNs
If we have more than 1 Vote for a LIR, based on the fee (fee: 4500, have 3 Votes), that will lead to monopol, mastodont companies will do what they want will vote and accept decisions only for their interests. And I can not call it democracy nor fair for all.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Evgeniy Brodskiy wrote:
Confidential/?????????????
Hi Ivaylo, just to clarify, if some LIR pay for 2 chank of resource does it mean it has 2 votes ?? If contribution is not equal why votes should be equal ??
----------------- Best regards,
Evgeniy Brodskiy Kyivstar | Network engineer Kyiv, Ukraine
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of ivaylo Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 4:54 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
[????? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ????????? ?????????? ????? ??? ivaylo@bglans.net. ??????????, ???? ?? ???????: https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Every Year we talking same things and every year the result is zero...
Clearly it is not fair company which holds /22 IPV4 /32 IPV6 and few ASN to pay same amount as a company with /8 IPV4 /20 IPV6 and tens (if not hundreds) ASNs.
Clearly charging scheme based on the holded resource not accepting. Well then why not we think about hard coded resource limits for each member:
Annual fee of 1500 Euro per LIR gives : 1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32...) 8 x ASNs
If a LIR pass one or more of the above parameters the applied Annual fee +1500 Euro, so such LIR can hold and manage:
2 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum) 2 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum) 16 x ASN
If again pass one or more of these +1500 Euro and so on.
RIPE to send emails to each member with calculation for its next year fee, and with ask to free resources and return back to RIPE. Newly freed resources to be spread across members who not reach the first target (or at least to can ask for new resources without additional fee):
1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22 e.t.c.) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32... e.t.c) 8 x ASNs
To legacy resource holders to be given 1 year, to find sponsoring LIR, and their resources to be counted in the LIR account sum resources. Or to be asked to become LIRs, with 500 euro one pay joining fee.
This way RIPE can predict and calculate its bugdet much better.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Firma KOMPEX wrote:
Hi
it would be fair if the resource was not valued as a resource only as the number of IPs IP should be the basis for settlement - it is actually a cost there is a shortage of addresses, and some people have a lot of them unused and do not return them. If they paid for the addresses and it was a cost for them, they would wonder whether they really need them or whether it would be better to return some of them.
Pozdrawiam Gabriel Sulka
------------------------------------------------------------- Firma Handlowo - Us?ugowa KOMPEX 34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00 http://www.k/ ompex.pl%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0ba c9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6 38473209301289732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoi V2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vRog6oP4 cUl4jHHJwJtNmslrzbOIHlONn0zSTZyVOW8%3D&reserved=0 ; bok@kompex.pl ; kompex@nowytarg.net
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:49 PM To: domain@wkey.it Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote:
My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional resources a company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time of joining Ripe.
... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards. Back then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP...
So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already).
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvgen iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638473209301298466%7CUnknown%7CTW FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6 Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zGN5MtVkwMRKjIKh8U8zUxrmFFkQrZJ4eiuEv%2B RKwu8%3D&reserved=0 Unsubscribe: https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fivaylo%2540bglans.n et&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e230 1e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C6384732093 01303571%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiL CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p4kryouKS1u%2F%2F mNi3sDc3friXMlh5MIiUrR8nVxR5m0%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________ 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/registry%40kyivstar.n...
_______________________________________________ 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/mihail%40fedorov.net
exactly IP address is not the property of a company that was established in the 1980s or 1990s. When Ripe was so rigorous, he did not think about the use of IP addresses and gave them away because he had them. An IP address is a social good and should be available equally to everyone Pozdrawiam/Best Regard's Gabriel Sulka -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mihail Fedorov Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 8:19 PM To: ivaylo <ivaylo@bglans.net> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available Is this discussion about RIPE fee plans or about IPv4 usage? That’s 2 different questions :-) My opinion both can be solved by fee identical to the number v4 in use, for example 1 USD year per /32 address. If someone (presumably big company) wants to keep their bag of /8’s - they should be actually using them. When IP is in use that’s fair to assume it’s generating income and that 1 USD per used address is not a problem at all. And if someone wants just to keep big subnet because it was given to them on early days of internet - this will become indeed expensive and it will motivate to return/sell some. Outcome 1: small eyeball networks will be able to get at least /24 without astronomical investment and/or 2 year wait and pay just 254 USD for account. Outcome 2: Big ISPs and companies will pay significantly larger fee (yet literally nothing for them) and RIPE income will be much bigger. Addresses is not asset which should be kept and accounted in company “balance”. Policy always assumed fair *use*, not fair *keep*. Same way domains require small fee per each making keeping thousands not in use a bit expensive.
On 29 Mar 2024, at 20:05, ivaylo <ivaylo@bglans.net> wrote:
1 LIR = 1 Vote
If you want 2 Votes, always can register other company as LIR. And you again will pay 1500 euro and have same resource limits (before next step up = +1500):
1 x /20 IPV4 block 1 x /29 IPV6 block 8 ASNs
If we have more than 1 Vote for a LIR, based on the fee (fee: 4500, have 3 Votes), that will lead to monopol, mastodont companies will do what they want will vote and accept decisions only for their interests. And I can not call it democracy nor fair for all.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Evgeniy Brodskiy wrote:
Confidential/?????????????
Hi Ivaylo, just to clarify, if some LIR pay for 2 chank of resource does it mean it has 2 votes ?? If contribution is not equal why votes should be equal ??
----------------- Best regards,
Evgeniy Brodskiy Kyivstar | Network engineer Kyiv, Ukraine
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of ivaylo Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 4:54 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
[????? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ????????? ?????????? ????? ??? ivaylo@bglans.net. ??????????, ???? ?? ???????: https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Every Year we talking same things and every year the result is zero...
Clearly it is not fair company which holds /22 IPV4 /32 IPV6 and few ASN to pay same amount as a company with /8 IPV4 /20 IPV6 and tens (if not hundreds) ASNs.
Clearly charging scheme based on the holded resource not accepting. Well then why not we think about hard coded resource limits for each member:
Annual fee of 1500 Euro per LIR gives : 1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32...) 8 x ASNs
If a LIR pass one or more of the above parameters the applied Annual fee +1500 Euro, so such LIR can hold and manage:
2 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum) 2 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum) 16 x ASN
If again pass one or more of these +1500 Euro and so on.
RIPE to send emails to each member with calculation for its next year fee, and with ask to free resources and return back to RIPE. Newly freed resources to be spread across members who not reach the first target (or at least to can ask for new resources without additional fee):
1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22 e.t.c.) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32... e.t.c) 8 x ASNs
To legacy resource holders to be given 1 year, to find sponsoring LIR, and their resources to be counted in the LIR account sum resources. Or to be asked to become LIRs, with 500 euro one pay joining fee.
This way RIPE can predict and calculate its bugdet much better.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Firma KOMPEX wrote:
Hi
it would be fair if the resource was not valued as a resource only as the number of IPs IP should be the basis for settlement - it is actually a cost there is a shortage of addresses, and some people have a lot of them unused and do not return them. If they paid for the addresses and it was a cost for them, they would wonder whether they really need them or whether it would be better to return some of them.
Pozdrawiam Gabriel Sulka
------------------------------------------------------------- Firma Handlowo - Us?ugowa KOMPEX 34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00 http://www.k/ ompex.pl%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0 ba c9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7 C6 38473209301289732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIj oi V2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vRog6o P4 cUl4jHHJwJtNmslrzbOIHlONn0zSTZyVOW8%3D&reserved=0 ; bok@kompex.pl ; kompex@nowytarg.net
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:49 PM To: domain@wkey.it Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote:
My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional resources a company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time of joining Ripe.
... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards. Back then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP...
So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already).
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvg en iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9 bd 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638473209301298466%7CUnknown%7C TW FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVC I6 Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zGN5MtVkwMRKjIKh8U8zUxrmFFkQrZJ4eiuEv% 2B RKwu8%3D&reserved=0 Unsubscribe: https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fivaylo%2540bglans .n et&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2 30 1e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C63847320 93 01303571%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzI iL CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p4kryouKS1u%2F% 2F mNi3sDc3friXMlh5MIiUrR8nVxR5m0%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________ 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/registry%40kyi vstar.net
_______________________________________________ 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/mihail%40fedoro v.net
_______________________________________________ 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/gabi%40kompex.pl
I fully agree with Gabriel. It is absurd and ridicolous that in 2024, a company founded just a few years earlier, seeking additional /24 IP addresses, must engage in absurd machinations and pay huge sums for them. Meanwhile, a company that has been around for 30 years and acquired vast amounts of addresses at a time when they were freely distributed is hoarding them, leaving the addresses unused. This contradicts the fundamental ideas of the existence and functioning of the Internet as a common good. An appropriate audit procedure should be implemented, and this issue should be addressed and regulated. BR Piotr Siwicki W dniu 2024-03-30 10:50, Firma KOMPEX napisał(a):
exactly IP address is not the property of a company that was established in the 1980s or 1990s. When Ripe was so rigorous, he did not think about the use of IP addresses and gave them away because he had them.
An IP address is a social good and should be available equally to everyone
Pozdrawiam/Best Regard's Gabriel Sulka
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Mihail Fedorov Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 8:19 PM To: ivaylo <ivaylo@bglans.net> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
Is this discussion about RIPE fee plans or about IPv4 usage? That's 2 different questions :-)
My opinion both can be solved by fee identical to the number v4 in use, for example 1 USD year per /32 address.
If someone (presumably big company) wants to keep their bag of /8's - they should be actually using them. When IP is in use that's fair to assume it's generating income and that 1 USD per used address is not a problem at all.
And if someone wants just to keep big subnet because it was given to them on early days of internet - this will become indeed expensive and it will motivate to return/sell some.
Outcome 1: small eyeball networks will be able to get at least /24 without astronomical investment and/or 2 year wait and pay just 254 USD for account.
Outcome 2: Big ISPs and companies will pay significantly larger fee (yet literally nothing for them) and RIPE income will be much bigger.
Addresses is not asset which should be kept and accounted in company "balance". Policy always assumed fair *use*, not fair *keep*.
Same way domains require small fee per each making keeping thousands not in use a bit expensive.
On 29 Mar 2024, at 20:05, ivaylo <ivaylo@bglans.net> wrote:
1 LIR = 1 Vote
If you want 2 Votes, always can register other company as LIR. And you again will pay 1500 euro and have same resource limits (before next step up = +1500):
1 x /20 IPV4 block 1 x /29 IPV6 block 8 ASNs
If we have more than 1 Vote for a LIR, based on the fee (fee: 4500, have 3 Votes), that will lead to monopol, mastodont companies will do what they want will vote and accept decisions only for their interests. And I can not call it democracy nor fair for all.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Evgeniy Brodskiy wrote:
Confidential/?????????????
Hi Ivaylo, just to clarify, if some LIR pay for 2 chank of resource does it mean it has 2 votes ?? If contribution is not equal why votes should be equal ??
----------------- Best regards,
Evgeniy Brodskiy Kyivstar | Network engineer Kyiv, Ukraine
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of ivaylo Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 4:54 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
[????? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ????????? ?????????? ????? ??? ivaylo@bglans.net. ??????????, ???? ?? ???????: https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Every Year we talking same things and every year the result is zero...
Clearly it is not fair company which holds /22 IPV4 /32 IPV6 and few ASN to pay same amount as a company with /8 IPV4 /20 IPV6 and tens (if not hundreds) ASNs.
Clearly charging scheme based on the holded resource not accepting. Well then why not we think about hard coded resource limits for each member:
Annual fee of 1500 Euro per LIR gives : 1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32...) 8 x ASNs
If a LIR pass one or more of the above parameters the applied Annual fee +1500 Euro, so such LIR can hold and manage:
2 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum) 2 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum) 16 x ASN
If again pass one or more of these +1500 Euro and so on.
RIPE to send emails to each member with calculation for its next year fee, and with ask to free resources and return back to RIPE. Newly freed resources to be spread across members who not reach the first target (or at least to can ask for new resources without additional fee):
1 x /20 Block of IPV4 (sum can be 16 x /24 or 4 x /22 e.t.c.) 1 x /29 Block of IPV6 (sum can be 8 x /32... e.t.c) 8 x ASNs
To legacy resource holders to be given 1 year, to find sponsoring LIR, and their resources to be counted in the LIR account sum resources. Or to be asked to become LIRs, with 500 euro one pay joining fee.
This way RIPE can predict and calculate its bugdet much better.
Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024, Firma KOMPEX wrote:
Hi
it would be fair if the resource was not valued as a resource only as the number of IPs IP should be the basis for settlement - it is actually a cost there is a shortage of addresses, and some people have a lot of them unused and do not return them. If they paid for the addresses and it was a cost for them, they would wonder whether they really need them or whether it would be better to return some of them.
Pozdrawiam Gabriel Sulka
------------------------------------------------------------- Firma Handlowo - Us?ugowa KOMPEX 34-400 Nowy Targ ul. Szaflarska 62A tel(18) 264-60-55 pn-pt 09:30 - 17:00 sb. 09:30 - 13:00 http://www.k/ ompex.pl%2F&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0 ba c9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7 C6 38473209301289732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIj oi V2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vRog6o P4 cUl4jHHJwJtNmslrzbOIHlONn0zSTZyVOW8%3D&reserved=0 ; bok@kompex.pl ; kompex@nowytarg.net
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:49 PM To: domain@wkey.it Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:04:30PM +0100, Andrea Borghi wrote: My humble proposal is to class basing on how many additional resources a company have beyond the basics that was valid at the time of joining Ripe.
... and possibly how old these resources are... we got our blocks in 1995/1996, and they are considered "large" by today's standards. Back then, it was what you got as a fast-growing small ISP...
So if we really go for something based on allocation size, adding a yearly depreciation factor in would make this "more fair" (... we've been paying our share for the last 29(!) years already).
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmembers-discuss&data=05%7C02%7CEvg en iy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2301e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9 bd 573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C638473209301298466%7CUnknown%7C TW FpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVC I6 Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zGN5MtVkwMRKjIKh8U8zUxrmFFkQrZJ4eiuEv% 2B RKwu8%3D&reserved=0 Unsubscribe: https://list/ s.ripe.net%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fmembers-discuss%2Fivaylo%2540bglans .n et&data=05%7C02%7CEvgeniy.Brodskiy%40kyivstar.net%7C9925aa0bac9844e2 30 1e08dc500035da%7Cf8f9bd573bba4300a6ec3b8e70a30986%7C0%7C0%7C63847320 93 01303571%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzI iL CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p4kryouKS1u%2F% 2F mNi3sDc3friXMlh5MIiUrR8nVxR5m0%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________ 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/registry%40kyi vstar.net _______________________________________________ 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/mihail%40fedoro v.net _______________________________________________ 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/gabi%40kompex.pl _______________________________________________ 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/p.siwicki%40connected... -- z poważaniem, ------------------------------------------------------------------ Prezes Zarządu Connected Sp. z o.o. Piotr Siwicki ul. Królewska 57 30-081 Kraków tel +48 506144544 tel. +48 12 3121301 fax +48 12 3121302 p.siwicki@connected.pl http://connected.pl email:boa@connected.pl ------------------------------------------------------------------ Wszystkie dane zawarte w niniejszej wiadomości i załącznikach do niej są własnością Connected i jesteście Państwo zobowiązani do traktowania ich jako poufne. All data as well as documents enclosed in this message to present communication are property of Connected and you are obliged to treat them as confidential. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Connected Sp. z o.o. ul. Królewska 57, 30-081 Kraków Sąd Rejonowy dla Miasta Krakowa, XI Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego KRS 0000314669 NIP: 679-29-90-026 Kapitał zakładowy 180000 PLN SWIFT : DEUTPLPK nr konta: 22 1910 1048 2103 6590 0001
Moin,
An appropriate audit procedure should be implemented, and this issue should be addressed and regulated.
This discussion has been gravitating around putting _additional_ tasks in the form of being the 'address usage police' on the NCC for some time now. Any form of de-allocation (and we are not even talking LEGACY here, see what is going on in ARIN) is a significant administrative process. Furthermore, no matter how _I_ view addresses (as non-property, of course), many entities actually _do_ view them as property. As such, starting any kind of endeavor of de-allocation is just a sure-shot way of ensuring close to eternal job security for civil litigation lawyers in the NCC region; With the associated additional costs to be shouldered by the membership. However, instead of trying to solve the _social_ problem of IPv4 "keeping without necessarily needing" with some form of policy-legal- hammer, we could also just solve the _technical_ problem of IPv4 scarcity by rolling out IPv6 (as imperfect as it may be). I would bet my whole v4 allocation that--on societal scale, and even when considering rather slow moving enterprises and complex legacy setups--globally rolling out v6 everywhere is _significantly_ cheaper than the long tail of litigation any form of deallocation would drag along. With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M tobias@fiebig.nl
I will not agree with such thinking. In the past, witches were burned at the stakes people died of fever in large numbers once RIP handed out IP addresses without a second thought knowledge and awareness of people is unfortunately limited today we have the knowledge and skills to remedy this one of them is to introduce a fee for IP. The problem will solve itself who uses IP will have no problem to pay 1 EUR/32 who does not use IP will have a cost with which he has to face the mirror and, as in any business, make a decision. Pozdrawiam/Best Regard's Gabriel Sulka -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Tobias Fiebig via members-discuss Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2024 11:19 AM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Cc: Tobias Fiebig <tobias+ripe@fiebig.nl> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available Moin,
An appropriate audit procedure should be implemented, and this issue should be addressed and regulated.
This discussion has been gravitating around putting _additional_ tasks in the form of being the 'address usage police' on the NCC for some time now. Any form of de-allocation (and we are not even talking LEGACY here, see what is going on in ARIN) is a significant administrative process. Furthermore, no matter how _I_ view addresses (as non-property, of course), many entities actually _do_ view them as property. As such, starting any kind of endeavor of de-allocation is just a sure-shot way of ensuring close to eternal job security for civil litigation lawyers in the NCC region; With the associated additional costs to be shouldered by the membership. However, instead of trying to solve the _social_ problem of IPv4 "keeping without necessarily needing" with some form of policy-legal- hammer, we could also just solve the _technical_ problem of IPv4 scarcity by rolling out IPv6 (as imperfect as it may be). I would bet my whole v4 allocation that--on societal scale, and even when considering rather slow moving enterprises and complex legacy setups--globally rolling out v6 everywhere is _significantly_ cheaper than the long tail of litigation any form of deallocation would drag along. With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M tobias@fiebig.nl _______________________________________________ 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/gabi%40kompex.pl
Le Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 11:19:26AM +0100, Tobias Fiebig via members-discuss a écrit :
However, instead of trying to solve the _social_ problem of IPv4 "keeping without necessarily needing" with some form of policy-legal- hammer, we could also just solve the _technical_ problem of IPv4 scarcity by rolling out IPv6 (as imperfect as it may be).
As much as I agree on this, it does not answer the question of how to make RIPE NCC activities sustainable in a world where the number of LIR decreases. -- Denis Fondras / Liopen
Moin,
As much as I agree on this, it does not answer the question of how to make RIPE NCC activities sustainable in a world where the number of LIR decreases.
I think that that is a decoupled point from the one I responded to, i.e., the idea of starting deallocation of (assumed to be) "unused" resources. Back to the budget: IIRC there was a proposal for a KYDAT taskforce by Erik Bais. Did that proposal go anywhere? I am currently not sure based on the ML discussion back then. With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M tobias@fiebig.nl
There was no proposal of any “deallocation” in this thread. Only gradually creating flat fee based on number of addresses, regardless if it’s legacy resource or not. Any company of any size willing to lower fee will be motivated to review it’s IP usage policy and to sell or return addresses they do not use. I’m not sure about exact fee, 1 USD was just an example - this must be counted based on current RIPE operating needs. Maybe somewhere between 10 cents and 1 dollar per address per year. Many small or medium projects will be able to get some minimal addresses they actually need without huge investment and being punished for the fact they are not from 90’s. And comparing ISP that actually uses few /16’s for broadband customers and some small non-profit local network is not normal, they should not pay same fee.
On 30 Mar 2024, at 13:35, Tobias Fiebig via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> wrote:
Moin,
As much as I agree on this, it does not answer the question of how to make RIPE NCC activities sustainable in a world where the number of LIR decreases.
I think that that is a decoupled point from the one I responded to, i.e., the idea of starting deallocation of (assumed to be) "unused" resources.
Back to the budget: IIRC there was a proposal for a KYDAT taskforce by Erik Bais. Did that proposal go anywhere? I am currently not sure based on the ML discussion back then.
With best regards, Tobias
-- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M tobias@fiebig.nl
_______________________________________________ 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/mihail%40fedorov.net
Returns to the RIPE pool are unlikely to happen. IPv4 addresses are in short supply. There is always a buyer. From the point of view of the resource holder, it is better to monetize held addresses than to return them without any further benefit... There is no point in lying that the per-resource model will make IPv4 accessible to other (new) members. It will not happen. And it's not worth trying to solve it somehow. It's dead-horse ride. - Daniel On 3/30/24 8:53 PM, Mihail Fedorov wrote:
There was no proposal of any “deallocation” in this thread. Only gradually creating flat fee based on number of addresses, regardless if it’s legacy resource or not. Any company of any size willing to lower fee will be motivated to review it’s IP usage policy and to sell or return addresses they do not use.
Hello! It may be great to have some encouraging mechanism in the Charging Scheme for using IPv6. Regards, Naira -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Denis Fondras - Liopen Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2024 2:32 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Open House: Recording and Slides Available Le Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 11:19:26AM +0100, Tobias Fiebig via members-discuss a écrit :
However, instead of trying to solve the _social_ problem of IPv4 "keeping without necessarily needing" with some form of policy-legal- hammer, we could also just solve the _technical_ problem of IPv4 scarcity by rolling out IPv6 (as imperfect as it may be).
As much as I agree on this, it does not answer the question of how to make RIPE NCC activities sustainable in a world where the number of LIR decreases. -- Denis Fondras / Liopen _______________________________________________ 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/nkuroyan%40telecomarm...
On 30/03/2024 12:50, Firma KOMPEX wrote:
IP address is not the property of a company that was established in the 1980s or 1990s. When Ripe was so rigorous, he did not think about the use of IP addresses and gave them away because he had them.
Correction: we did not receive any IP address blocks from RIPE. We received our IP blocks *before* RIPE existed. They are called legacy allocations.
An IP address is a social good and should be available equally to everyone
Pozdrawiam/Best Regard's Gabriel Sulka
Regards, Hank
Hi, On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 10:18:35PM +0300, Mihail Fedorov wrote:
Outcome 2: Big ISPs and companies will pay significantly larger fee (yet literally nothing for them) and RIPE income will be much bigger.
What exactly makes people assume that just because someone got a bigger IPv4 block 25+ years ago means "they have huge amounts of money"? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
On 31/03/2024, 12:26:08, "Gert Doering" <gert@space.net> wrote:
What exactly makes people assume that just because someone got a bigger IPv4 block 25+ years ago means "they have huge amounts of money????
Capitalism: Addresses can be sold for money, lots of addresses = can get lots of money, if they do not have enough money to pay to keep addresses then sell some to cover fees on the remaining. It also follows in that logic that if they can't sell because the IPs are in use then that must be generating enough money to pay fees to keep them. The edge cases that do not match this do not matter. brandon
Gert Every single time I see this argument being trucked out I cringe. It’s a ridiculous argument that doesn’t hold water. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.
participants (12)
-
Brandon Butterworth -
Daniel Suchy -
Denis Fondras - Liopen -
Firma KOMPEX -
Gert Doering -
Hank Nussbacher -
ivaylo -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Mihail Fedorov -
Naira Kuroyan -
Piotr Siwicki Connected sp. z o.o. -
Tobias Fiebig