Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as *ipv4.global*, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: - hold vast historical IPv4 resources, - use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and - monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- *Sinqerisht / Sincerely,* AlbHost [image: Logo] <https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net W*: *wWw.AlbaHost.Net <http://www.albahost.net/> [image: Facebook icon] <https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [image: Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [image: Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [image: Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on. Kaj ________________________________ From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: * hold vast historical IPv4 resources, * use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and * monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost [Logo]<https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net<http://www.albahost.net/> [Facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24? -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM An: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on. Kaj ________________________________ From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: * hold vast historical IPv4 resources, * use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and * monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost [Logo]<https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net<http://www.albahost.net/> [Facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
Sebastian, I don’t know how it works in Germany, but here in Czechia, a few hundred kilometers away, in elections everyone generally has one vote, regardless of how much they pay in taxes. I dare say that in any democratic system it works more or less the same way. But don’t worry — we, the small operators who didn’t manage to stock up on IPv4 back when they were handed out on request, don’t really follow what’s going on in RIPE that closely, so outvoting us apparently hasn’t been much of a problem so far. Michal ------ Původní zpráva ------ Od Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de Komu kajtzu@basen.net; members-discuss@ripe.net; info@albahost.net Kopie michal@krajcirovic.cz Datum 06.02.2026 16:19:04 Předmět Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24?
--
Kind regards
Sebastian Becker
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM An: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on.
Kaj
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Dear colleagues,
I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion.
Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today.
At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market.
In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that:
hold vast historical IPv4 resources,
use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and
monetise the remainder at market prices,
is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective.
If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost.
Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution.
Kind regards, Mentor L.
-- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost Logo <https://www.albahost.net/>
AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net <mailto:info@albahost.net>
W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net <http://www.albahost.net/> Facebook icon <https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> Twitter icon <https://twitter.com/albahost> Instagram icon <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/>
Banner
Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen.
The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
Hi Michal, I just want to understand what people under equal rights see. And I think you know that politics are heavily influenced by money. My comment was to point out that ‘equal’ might mean different things to different groups. And Nick just described very well why the community has decided in the past in favour of the flat model. -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Gesendet: Friday, February 6, 2026 4:25:13 PM An: Becker, Sebastian <Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de>; kajtzu@basen.net <kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> Betreff: Re[2]: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Sebastian, I don’t know how it works in Germany, but here in Czechia, a few hundred kilometers away, in elections everyone generally has one vote, regardless of how much they pay in taxes. I dare say that in any democratic system it works more or less the same way. But don’t worry — we, the small operators who didn’t manage to stock up on IPv4 back when they were handed out on request, don’t really follow what’s going on in RIPE that closely, so outvoting us apparently hasn’t been much of a problem so far. Michal ------ Původní zpráva ------ Od Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de<mailto:Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de> Komu kajtzu@basen.net<mailto:kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> Kopie michal@krajcirovic.cz<mailto:michal@krajcirovic.cz> Datum 06.02.2026 16:19:04 Předmět Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24? -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM An: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on. Kaj ________________________________ From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: * hold vast historical IPv4 resources, * use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and * monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost [Logo]<https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net<http://www.albahost.net/> [Facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
Hi Sebastien, Under equal rights, we see exactly that : equal rights granted by the RIPE NCC. LIR with huge IPv4 pools have been granted more operational rights than LIR with small IPv4 pools by the RIPE NCC. How is that equals rights ? An appropriate way to manage that is to make membership fees proportional to rights granted by the RIPE NCC. Of course, if you don't want your membership fee to be raised accordingly to the rights granted to your LIR, you are free to give of a part of them by returning some IPv4 pools to the RIPE NCC. Kind regards, Alexandre Le 06/02/2026 à 16:38, Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss a écrit :
Hi Michal,
I just want to understand what people under equal rights see.
And I think you know that politics are heavily influenced by money.
My comment was to point out that ‘equal’ might mean different things to different groups.
And Nick just described very well why the community has decided in the past in favour of the flat model.
--
Kind regards
Sebastian Becker
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Von:* Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> *Gesendet:* Friday, February 6, 2026 4:25:13 PM *An:* Becker, Sebastian <Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de>; kajtzu@basen.net <kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> *Betreff:* Re[2]: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Sebastian, I don’t know how it works in Germany, but here in Czechia, a few hundred kilometers away, in elections everyone generally has one vote, regardless of how much they pay in taxes.
I dare say that in any democratic system it works more or less the same way.
But don’t worry — we, the small operators who didn’t manage to stock up on IPv4 back when they were handed out on request, don’t really follow what’s going on in RIPE that closely, so outvoting us apparently hasn’t been much of a problem so far.
Michal
------ Původní zpráva ------ Od Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de <mailto:Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de> Komu kajtzu@basen.net <mailto:kajtzu@basen.net>; members- discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <mailto:info@albahost.net> Kopie michal@krajcirovic.cz <mailto:michal@krajcirovic.cz> Datum 06.02.2026 16:19:04 Předmět Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24?
--
Kind regards
Sebastian Becker
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Von:* Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> *Gesendet:* Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM *An:* members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> *Cc:* Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> *Betreff:* [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on.
Kaj
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> *Sent:* Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 *To:* members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> *Cc:* Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> *Subject:* [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
Dear colleagues,
I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion.
Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today.
At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as *ipv4.global*, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE- compliant transfer market.
In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that:
*
hold vast historical IPv4 resources,
*
use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and
*
monetise the remainder at market prices,
is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective.
If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non- profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost.
Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution.
Kind regards, Mentor L.
-- *Sinqerisht / Sincerely,* AlbHost Logo <https://www.albahost.net/> *AlbHost SH.P.K.* Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net <mailto:info@albahost.net> W*: **wWw.AlbaHost.Net <http://www.albahost.net/>* Facebook icon <https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting>Twitter icon <https://twitter.com/albahost>Instagram icon <https:// www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> Banner Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen.
The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
I definitely support the equal rights with one vote per organization, however because fee’s are low it does create a situation where some resource holders do not consolidate their LIRs for a variety of reasons, including more voting power. Additionally, I very much support an equitable charging scheme. I know as a larger organization we use RIPE services more frequently than some and yet only pay a very nominal fee, compared to other critical costs at our scale. I would like to see a fee distribution where many organizations pay less than they do today, and larger holders of resources pay an equitable amount. The current model with a top tier cost of 10k is too low, which means the mid-tier bears an unfair amount of financial burden. Flight risk for large organizations because of increased fees is very minimal if you choose a fee structure comparable structure to other RIRs. Our organization for example holds space in RIPE because we need it in that region; that will not change as long as RIPE operations are sound and reliable regardless of a fee increase. Regards, Tina Morris From: Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Date: Friday, February 6, 2026 at 8:21 AM To: michal@krajcirovic.cz <michal@krajcirovic.cz>, kajtzu@basen.net <kajtzu@basen.net>, members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>, info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Michal, I just want to understand what people under equal rights see. And I think you know that politics are heavily influenced by money. My comment was to point out that ‘equal’ might mean different things to different groups. And Nick just described very well why the community has decided in the past in favour of the flat model. -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Gesendet: Friday, February 6, 2026 4:25:13 PM An: Becker, Sebastian <Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de>; kajtzu@basen.net <kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> Betreff: Re[2]: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Sebastian, I don’t know how it works in Germany, but here in Czechia, a few hundred kilometers away, in elections everyone generally has one vote, regardless of how much they pay in taxes. I dare say that in any democratic system it works more or less the same way. But don’t worry — we, the small operators who didn’t manage to stock up on IPv4 back when they were handed out on request, don’t really follow what’s going on in RIPE that closely, so outvoting us apparently hasn’t been much of a problem so far. Michal ------ Původní zpráva ------ Od Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de<mailto:Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de> Komu kajtzu@basen.net<mailto:kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> Kopie michal@krajcirovic.cz<mailto:michal@krajcirovic.cz> Datum 06.02.2026 16:19:04 Předmět Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24? -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM An: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on. Kaj ________________________________ From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: * hold vast historical IPv4 resources, * use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and * monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost [Logo]<https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net<http://www.albahost.net/> [Facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
As far as I understand members already enjoy equal voting rights. Kaj Sent from my iPhone ________________________________ From: Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de <Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de> Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 5:19 PM To: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> Cc: michal@krajcirovic.cz <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24? -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM An: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on. Kaj ________________________________ From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: * hold vast historical IPv4 resources, * use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and * monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost [Logo]<https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net<http://www.albahost.net/> [Facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
No, you have one vote per LIR. Not per resource. -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker TELEKOM DEUTSCHLAND GMBH T Wholesale Sebastian Becker Global Peering Manager (AS3320) Landgrabenweg 149, 53227 Bonn, Germany +49 170 2224049<tel:+491702224049> (Mobil) sebastian-becker@telekom.de<mailto:sebastian-becker@telekom.de> wholesale.telekom.com<https://wholesale.telekom.com/> [signatureImage] The compulsory statement can be found here: www.telekom.com/compulsory-statement<http://www.telekom.com/compulsory-statement> ________________________________ Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Friday, February 6, 2026 4:28:34 PM An: Becker, Sebastian <Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> Cc: michal@krajcirovic.cz <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments As far as I understand members already enjoy equal voting rights. Kaj Sent from my iPhone ________________________________ From: Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de <Sebastian-Becker@telekom.de> Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 5:19 PM To: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; info@albahost.net <info@albahost.net> Cc: michal@krajcirovic.cz <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Does your idea also include equal voting rights to the amount of the payment per resource? Like one vote for each /24? -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker ________________________________ Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Freitag, Februar 6, 2026 4:07 PM An: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>; AlbHost SH.P.K <info@albahost.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Uniform pricing for membership fees would align well with procedural fairness. That is, the same price exists for everyone and there aren't any discounts. If you have discounts someone will always find a special interest group, that they should be entitled to it for whatever reason, and so on and on and on. Kaj ________________________________ From: AlbHost SH.P.K via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2026 18:52 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Cc: Michal Krajčírovič <michal@krajcirovic.cz> Subject: [members-discuss] Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Dear colleagues, I would like to explicitly support Michal’s position, in particular regarding the proposed discounts for educational institutions, and add an important practical aspect to this discussion. Many universities and similar institutions received extremely large IPv4 allocations in the past—often /16 or even multiple /16 blocks. In a significant number of cases, only a very small fraction of these resources (sometimes just one to three /24s) is actually used for their own operational needs today. At the same time, it is publicly observable that IPv4 address space originating from such legacy allocations is being sold or transferred on the open market via platforms such as ipv4.global, at fully commercial prices (currently on the order of ~30 EUR per IPv4 address). This is not speculation; it is an established and RIPE-compliant transfer market. In this context, granting fee reductions to organisations that: * hold vast historical IPv4 resources, * use only a minimal portion of them operationally, and * monetise the remainder at market prices, is difficult to justify from a fairness perspective. If educational institutions are to benefit from discounted RIPE fees, this should at minimum be conditional upon the substantial return of unused IPv4 address space to the free pool. Without such a mechanism, the proposed model effectively rewards address hoarding while shifting the financial burden onto smaller commercial LIRs, start-ups, and non-profit-adjacent organisations that must both pay full RIPE fees and acquire IPv4 addresses at full market cost. Absent meaningful IPv4 reclamation, fee discounts for organisations already in possession of disproportionately large legacy allocations appear inequitable and inconsistent with the stated principles of efficient and fair resource distribution. Kind regards, Mentor L. -- Sinqerisht / Sincerely, AlbHost [Logo]<https://www.albahost.net/> AlbHost SH.P.K. Besim Beka p.n. 50000 Gjakovë, Kosovë. NIPT/VAT ID: 811442657 T: +383900501502 E: info@albahost.net<mailto:info@albahost.net> W: wWw.AlbaHost.Net<http://www.albahost.net/> [Facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/albanianhosting> [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/albahost> [Instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/albahost_vpn/> [Banner] Përmbajtja e këtij emaili është konfidenciale dhe ka për qëllim marrësin e specifikuar vetëm në mesazh. Ndalohet rreptësisht shpërndarja e ndonjë pjese të këtij mesazhi me ndonjë palë të tretë, pa pëlqimin me shkrim të dërguesit. Nëse e keni marrë këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutemi përgjigjuni këtij mesazhi dhe ndiqni me fshirjen e tij, në mënyrë që të sigurohemi që një gabim i tillë të mos ndodhë në të ardhmen. The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.
Le Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 03:31:26PM +0000, Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss a écrit :
No, you have one vote per LIR. Not per resource.
No, it is one vote per member. -- Denis Fondras / Liopen
We have one vote. We have three LIRs It’s one member, one vote. I’ve seen multiple emails from people trying to suggest that it is otherwise. It isn’t. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072<tel:+353599183072> 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. From: Denis Fondras - Liopen via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Date: Monday, 9 February 2026 at 10:56 To: Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Le Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 03:31:26PM +0000, Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss a écrit :
No, you have one vote per LIR. Not per resource.
No, it is one vote per member. -- Denis Fondras / Liopen To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
Michelle, thank you for the clarification, you are right I was assuming that each LIR got a vote. I have 2 LIRs I manage for 2 distinct corporate entities so there are 2 votes. I wonder how common each scenario is? -Tina On Feb 10, 2026, at 16:04, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> wrote: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. We have one vote. We have three LIRs It’s one member, one vote. I’ve seen multiple emails from people trying to suggest that it is otherwise. It isn’t. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072<tel:+353599183072> 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. From: Denis Fondras - Liopen via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Date: Monday, 9 February 2026 at 10:56 To: Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Le Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 03:31:26PM +0000, Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss a écrit :
No, you have one vote per LIR. Not per resource.
No, it is one vote per member. -- Denis Fondras / Liopen To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/ To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
Hi guys, It was my misperception as well. I am with three LIRs, each a single member. I'm so sorry for the confusion. -- Kind regards Sebastian Becker [T-Logo mit Schriftzug "Connecting your world."] The compulsory statement can be found here: www.telekom.com/compulsory-statement<http://www.telekom.com/compulsory-statement> Von: Morris, Tina via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Datum: Dienstag, 10. Februar 2026 um 13:10 An: Michele Neylon Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Cc: Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments Michelle, thank you for the clarification, you are right I was assuming that each LIR got a vote. I have 2 LIRs I manage for 2 distinct corporate entities so there are 2 votes. I wonder how common each scenario is? -Tina On Feb 10, 2026, at 16:04, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> wrote: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. We have one vote. We have three LIRs It’s one member, one vote. I’ve seen multiple emails from people trying to suggest that it is otherwise. It isn’t. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072<tel:+353599183072> 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. From: Denis Fondras - Liopen via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Date: Monday, 9 February 2026 at 10:56 To: Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Le Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 03:31:26PM +0000, Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss a écrit :
No, you have one vote per LIR. Not per resource.
No, it is one vote per member. -- Denis Fondras / Liopen To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/ To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
Hi Tina, all, Although different from your type of situation, I can give you some data points on members vs LIR accounts. RIPE NCC members: 19,917 LIR accounts: 20,697 19,486 members have one LIR account, The remaining 431 members have 780 additional LIR accounts (so 1,211 accounts belong to members with multiple LIRs). Breaking down a little further: 311 members hold 2 LIR accounts each 62 hold 3 LIR accounts each 32 hold 4-5 LIR accounts each 19 hold 6-10 LIR accounts each 7 hold more than 10 LIR accounts each As clarified, it’s just the members who get a vote at the GM regardless of how many LIR accounts they have. But to complicate things slightly more, you need to be a member for six months before you get voting rights, so anyone who became a member from 21 November 2025 will be able to attend the upcoming GM but will not vote (208 members fall into this category currently). As you have seen, the situation with members vs LIR accounts can cause confusion, not just with voting but also with financial matters and administering a system that caters for both. Moving to a per-member charging system is a step towards making all this clearer, and protects somewhat from the issue of losing revenue when members consolidate their LIR accounts. Hope all this helps. Best regards, Fergal Cunningham Head of Membership Engagement RIPE NCC On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 1:11 PM Morris, Tina via members-discuss < members-discuss@ripe.net> wrote:
Michelle, thank you for the clarification, you are right I was assuming that each LIR got a vote. I have 2 LIRs I manage for 2 distinct corporate entities so there are 2 votes.
I wonder how common each scenario is?
-Tina
On Feb 10, 2026, at 16:04, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> wrote:
*CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
We have one vote.
We have three LIRs
It’s one member, one vote.
I’ve seen multiple emails from people trying to suggest that it is otherwise. It isn’t.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
*https://www.blacknight.com/ <https://www.blacknight.com/>*
*https://blacknight.blog/ <https://blacknight.blog/>*
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 <+353599183072>
Personal blog: *https://michele.blog/ <https://michele.blog/>*
Some thoughts: *https://ceo.hosting/ <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. *From: *Denis Fondras - Liopen via members-discuss < members-discuss@ripe.net> *Date: *Monday, 9 February 2026 at 10:56 *To: *Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss <members-discuss@ripe.net> *Subject: *[members-discuss] Re: Charging Scheme Model Consultation: Phase 2 - comments
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources.
Le Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 03:31:26PM +0000, Sebastian-Becker--- via members-discuss a écrit :
No, you have one vote per LIR. Not per resource.
No, it is one vote per member.
-- Denis Fondras / Liopen To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/ To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
participants (9)
-
AlbHost SH.P.K -
alexandre-ripe-ncc＠lotharedon.org -
Denis Fondras - Liopen -
Fergal Cunningham -
Kaj Niemi -
Michal Krajčírovič -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Morris, Tina -
Sebastian-Becker＠telekom.de