[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Yoel Caspersen
yoel at kviknet.dk
Thu Apr 11 09:35:32 CEST 2024
Dear RIPE member, Kaj Niemi is absolutely right: RIPE increasing its budget does not serve the interests of its members, and allowing it to pass because you are spending other people's money is a sign of bad judgement and lack of accountability. For years, I was wondering why RIPE was handing out /22 blocks at what was effectively a fraction of the market price. I think we have the answer now: Membership fees and diluted voting power of each member served the interests of the management just fine. RIPE is a mandatory phonebook for IP addresses, nothing more and nothing less. All the fat that has grown on the organisation in the last decade must be trimmed, and I call for a drastic budget reduction - if some members are willing to spend their own money on additional services, they should be free to do so, but with absolute emphasis on this part: their own money. >From a fairness perspective, RIPE should be granted the necessary funds to run the database service, meaning: - A base fee to keep the database service running, shared equally by all members - Fees on actions that require manual work from the RIPE NCC (e.g. transfers, mergers etc) Forget about levying higher taxes on larger members - RIPE is not a tax collector and doesn't exist to offset differences in wealth. It exists to deliver a necessary service, and each member should pay according to the burden they place on the organisation. How much should we pay for a database service? In the ideal world, there should be no monopoly on the service and we could let the market forces decide what the right price is. I realize that might not be feasible right now, so we are stuck with the next best solution: Letting the community figure out what the acceptable price is - I guess most RIPE members run some sort of database service of their own and therefore possess a profound understanding of the associated costs. Until we have better data, I suggest we look at the past for inspiration: Use the budget for 2014 (€ 22 millions) and adjust for inflation - that amounts to approximately € 28 millions. To get there we can slash External Engagement & Community (€ 9,4 millions in the 2024 budget) - RIPE is a monopoly, and the members will be there regardless of the activities in that area. I also suggest that we take a look at the expenses associated with the Office of the Managing Director (€ 2,2 millions in the 2024 budget) - after all, RIPE is an organisation with less than 200 employees. I call for members of the community to contribute: What is the right amount of staffing in the RIPE NCC? Regards, Yoel Caspersen CTO Kviknet.dk ApS On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 3:12 PM Kaj Niemi <kajtzu at basen.net> wrote: > Hi, > > > Very politely put I do not think any of the three proposed charging > schemes are in the membership's interest - they certainly aren't in mine. > > All three seem to be designed to assure that NCC can continue along, > business as usual, with its tasks. Thus, we could pretend that there isn't > a big issue with the membership numbers declining. We could also pretend > there isn't a real problem with the value proposition of the services. > Furthermore, we could also pretend that we do not care that it all is > conveniently funded by the membership. I mean, what is 1500 or 1900 euro to > most people? I have heard the last several times in the past. After all, > why should we care about the expenditure when the sums are so small for > each LIR? Why should we care when it is not our own money? I'll tell you. > Not caring about the transaction size is bad, if you are willing to let > these kinds of sums slide, you'll let it slide on bigger amounts. As is > treating other people's money (OPM) differently than if it were your own. > These eventually lead to lack of accountability. > > What is being proposed is really a significant increase in membership > fees. In particular, significantly above what it used to cost on average to > produce services for each member (whether they use them or not). Note when > I say what it used to cost, as in FY2024 the cost per LIR will be higher. > > Now, with the membership in further decline the average cost per member > will once more be higher in FY2025. Next year, I forecast that we will have > the same "discussion" for FY2026 as NCC comes around and asks for more > money. Once again. Why? Because according to projections the amount of > members will continue to decrease resulting in higher fees per > organization. Once again. All in the advantageous name of the articles of > association that allow pretty much anything. > > Following the above rational thought with another is, that what one should > be doing is choosing what to either invoice separately or drop completely. > Yes, really. Everyone is happy with free services, it is when you apply the > money test - request someone to pay for something - when you see if what > you create contains value. > > Considering NCC managed to "save" 5% in the FY2024 budget compared to > FY2023, asking for 8.1% increase (4% annualized) the next year is, well, > kind of cheeky. It restores the budget pretty much to what it would have > been with two annual increases. As an exercise in budgetary engineering I > do approve. As a paying member I do not. > > What really would be needed is competition. Competition would make the RIR > market more efficient. It is rather obvious that the RIR markets aren't > anywhere near the efficiency they could be at. Competition would mean that > people wanting to pay 1900 - or even more in the future - could choose to > do so and those who don't want could potentially pay less. Reduced to the > very basics one is paying for bits in a database. In that sense this is > rather similar to the certificate market where at one time the cost per > certificate was sky high and there were only a few issuers. Today, I am > guessing most do not pay thousands annually for a few bits in theirs. > Neither do most people care whether the cert was issued by Verisign, Gandi > or someone else. Having looked into it out of curiosity, real competition > does not seem to be possible as the principles in ICP-2 pretty much state > that there can/should only be one RIR per region. Which makes NCC the > definition of a monopoly. Monopolies with nice and polite people, well > intended purpose and mission creep are not good, they're bad. For everyone. > > Finally, the surplus. The concept itself is interesting and I do know > where it comes from. But from an financial point of view it is really > lending money to someone else and then (maybe) getting it back, a year > later, less inflation if they did not spend it. > > > I would kindly request that the EB would add option D or "Option D: No > Changes from 2023". :) > > > > > Kaj > > > > > > > > Kaj > ------------------------------ > *From:* ncc-announce <ncc-announce-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of > Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh at ripe.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 10, 2024 12:18 > *To:* ncc-announce at ripe.net <ncc-announce at ripe.net> > *Subject:* [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 > Proposals > > You don't often get email from simonjh at ripe.net. Learn why this is > important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> > > Dear RIPE NCC members, > > We can now share three draft charging scheme models for 2025 that the > Executive Board approved with the following resolution at its meeting on 25 > March 2024: > > The RIPE NCC Executive Board approves the submission of the RIPE NCC > Charging Scheme 2025 options to the upcoming RIPE NCC General Meeting for > members to vote on. > > > > - Option A - Charging Scheme as is with 22.58% price increase for the > annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,900) and a 0% price increase for > Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 50) > > - Option B - Charging Scheme as is with 20.97% price increase for the > annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,875) and a 50% price increase > for Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) > > - Option C - Charging Scheme as is with 16.13% price increase for the > annual contribution per LIR account (EUR 1,800), a 50% price increase for > Independent Internet number resource assignments* (EUR 75) and a new AS > Numbers fee of EUR 50 per assignment > > *Resources falling under this charge are IPv4 and IPv6 PI assignments; > Anycast assignments; IPv4 and IPv6 IXP assignments; and Legacy IPv4 > resource registrations through a sponsoring LIR. > > The full draft charging scheme models are available from the GM > Documentation page: > > https://www.ripe.net/membership/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2024/documentation-and-archives/supporting-documents/ > > Although the proposed models are relatively simple, we provide a > calculator where you can see exactly what you would pay under each of the > proposed models: > > https://www.ripe.net/documents/3757/CS2025_Member_Calculator.xlsx > > The main considerations for the Executive Board in proposing these three > models are: > > 1. The consolidation of LIR accounts, which means the burden to generate > sufficient income must be met by fewer accounts > > 2. Increased costs due to inflation that were previously catered for by > the large number of LIR accounts > > 3. Following the discussions last year and again this year, there appears > to be no clear consensus among members on how a category-based model would > work and the Board does not wish to put another category model forward at > the upcoming GM that will be rejected by the members. Rather, the Board > will propose a simple model that guarantees adequate funding for 2025 and > 2026 - under this proposal, we expect there would be no need for a fee > increase for 2026. The Board will work with the RIPE NCC on a more in-depth > consultation with the members aimed at arriving at a sustainable solution > for 2027 and beyond, possibly involving a new charging scheme task force. > > All three proposed models are designed to arrive at the same income of EUR > 41.1 million for the RIPE NCC in 2025. This will cover all current services > and activities, a 5% staff cost increase, a 2% inflation increase on all > non-staff costs, and EUR 1 million for additional work relating to registry > complexity and security projects aimed at ensuring the resilience of the > Registry and the RIPE NCC more broadly. Any such additional work would be > discussed with the membership during Activity Plan and Budget consultations > and then need to be approved by the Board. This will also allow some leeway > should more LIR accounts close than we expect. > > It’s important to note that the RIPE NCC aims for an income budget that > will provide a surplus, and this means that should we meet our budgetary > targets, a surplus can be returned to members in 2026 should they so wish. > > While the RIPE NCC continues to carry out cost-cutting efforts across the > organisation, drastically reducing the budget at this time is not advisable > due to the work that needs to be carried out, especially in relation to > maintaining high-quality registry services and securing the registry and > RIPE NCC systems. Cutting services or activities is not something the Board > is planning to do, and such actions would take time and need full > consultation with the membership. An overview of the activities and > services that the membership fee covers is provided below this email. > > I also urge you to see the presentation we delivered at the charging > scheme open house in March so that the full context of the situation and > the financial landscape we face is clear to you. The slides are available > at: > > > https://www.ripe.net/membership/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-charging-scheme-2025/ > > Finally, I want to thank all those who have contributed to the > consultation so far on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025. The models we > present here are draft and in two weeks we will announce the final proposal > that members will vote on at the GM on 22-24 May. Please discuss the draft > proposal on the members-discuss at ripe.net list - any input received by 19 > April can be incorporated if possible into the final models we propose. And > make sure to register for the GM so that you can vote on the charging > scheme that will apply for you and all members next year: > > https://my.ripe.net/#/meetings/active > > Simon-Jan Haytink > > Chief Financial Officer > > RIPE NCC > > Services and Activities Covered by the Member Fee > > - A trusted, efficient, accurate and resilient registry that guarantees > uniqueness of resources held by members > > - Neutral information services uninfluenced by commercial or government > interests that allow both the RIPE NCC and the community to carry out > useful research into the Internet > > - Engagement activities, including RIPE and regional meetings, that build > an active membership and community and that contribute to the overall good > of the Internet > > - A voice and influence for the membership in key decision-making fora, > including with governments and regulators > > - Protection of the Joint Internet Number Registry as developed by the > Internet community > > - Learning and development activities that help to address skills > shortages and contribute to an educated membership > > - Support for the Policy Development Process (PDP) > > - An authoritative registry of routing information provided by RPKI and > the RIPE Database > > - K-root and DNS services > > - A dedicated staff with considerable expertise contributing to all of the > above > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss at ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/yoel%40kviknet.dk > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20240411/384b91bb/attachment-0001.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]