[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 ]
sdy at a-n-t.ru
sdy at a-n-t.ru
Thu Apr 11 18:58:53 CEST 2024
Absolutely agree - it's abnormal situation. But now looks like NCC bosses continue ignore it. May be they are under control on Mercedes-Benz or UK Ministry of Defence??? :-) But really, it is look like, it is too difficult to reform charge scheme in this situation. > RIPE saying about last IPv4 /8 is run out, but stop... > > IPv4 /8 - Mercedes-Benz Group AG > https://apps.db.ripe.net/db-web-ui/query?bflag=false&dflag=false&rflag=true&searchtext=53.0.0.0&source=RIPE > (over 50% of pool unused! Guess they even didnt have so much cars for so > much IPs) > > IPv4 /8 - UK Ministry of Defence > https://apps.db.ripe.net/db-web-ui/query?bflag=false&dflag=false&rflag=true&searchtext=25.0.0.0&source=RIPE > (Never was announced - > https://stat.ripe.net/ui2013/%2025.0.0.0#tabId=at-a-glance) > > This members hold most biggest blocks in RIPE and didnt use it, but pay > same - 50 EUR/year for this IPv4 /8. > > When some LIRs have /8 and pay for that 50 EUR/year + 1600 EUR/year > (membership fee), other members paying same amount for 1 x /24 (if they > have luck!) > > Its nonsense, why RIPE continue to funding more and more budgets from > small LIRs? > > Its looks not good. Its looks like a some lobby! > > On 11.04.2024 15:52, Dmitry Kohmanyuk via members-discuss wrote: >> On 11 Apr 2024, at 16:55, Evgeniy Brodskiy via members-discuss >> <members-discuss at ripe.net> wrote: >>> >>> Confidential/Конфіденційно >> >> Just a note: you are posting on mailing list which is archived so >> everyone can read every post, yours too. Perhaps that line was added >> automatically:) >> >>> >>> Why do you think this statement is correct: “They are the main source >>> of work for RIPE employees.” ?? >>> >>> Even if you think about auditing or maintaining RIPE DB, it would be >>> strange to think that working with /16 requires 256 times more time and >>> effort than working with /24. >>> If you think about different "non-MAIN" services like Learning, then >>> there is no difference between big and small LIR at all. >>> Resources do not reflect all of these dependencies. And again you are >>> talking about fairness. >> >> In the fairness of use of learning resources, RPKI, Training you are >> correct, yet we are talking about “cost of doing business” resources. >> Since you seem to represent a biggest mobile telecom of Ukraine, >> Kyivstar, and also the only IPv6-enabled large ISP in the country >> (thanks for that btw) - what is your opinion re charging per resource >> allocated, either by category method, or logarithmic method, or some >> other (number of resources in use, objects in the database, etc.). Your >> company makes heavy use of IPv4 and has millions of subscribers: what >> does “fair” sounds like to you? Do you support extra fees for those who >> have IPv4 available, or discount for those who have to make do with IPv6 >> only? >> >> (Deleting hundreds of quoted lines below.) >> >> — dk at hostmaster.ua “We had IPv6 before Kyivstar” >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> On Behalf Of >>> Mihail Fedorov >>> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2024 3:39 PM >>> Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net >>> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC >>> Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals >>> >>> Charging per ASN is even worse than just price increase. It is terrible >>> and killing even more LIRs >>> >>> Imagine rather new LIR who is trying to do business based on what is >>> LIR intended for - providing LIR services to consumers. For example 30 >>> clients who requested ASN sponsorship during year. >>> If charged per ASN they will pay twice more than huge corporations >>> serving only purpose of their own. Those typically have just 1-2 ASNs >>> and tons of resources attached to it. They are main source of work for >>> RIPE staff and they should be funding expensive projects like Atlas and >>> others. >>> >>> Actually working LIRs also have business contracts/logic already >>> established on current charging scheme and adding ASN fee will kill >>> them. >>> >>> Once again - why not just bill based on resources? It’s extremely easy. >>> Oh, right, resource holders won’t like it : >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/admin%40roskomnadzor.io >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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/sdy%40a-n-t.ru > ----------------------------- С уважением Сербулов Дмитрий ООО "Альфа Нет Телеком" +7(498)785-8-000 раб. +7(495)940-92-11 доп. +7(925)518-10-69 сот.
- 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 ]