Hi, On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 04:22:50PM +0100, Martin Millnert wrote:
Out-of-the-box counter-proposal:
IPRA interacting work (including address space requests) == [IPRA hour fee] * [IPRA-time spent on application],
Pay per direct load on the hostmasters. This could encourage people having more clue interacting with the RIPE NCC and so on.
... but backfires if you have a particularily fast or slow IPRA... since these are humans with differing background, your request might hit one IPRA that has very much or very little experience on the way *you* want to roll out your network... or extra curiosity adding more e-mail rounds... so I'm not sure this can be done in a way that would be considered "fair". Just throwing concerns around.
Infrastructure cost sharing (yearly recurring cost) == [RIPE NCC specific registry / IPRA related costs] ----------------------------------------- number of LIRs at billing year end (*)
I'm not sure I get that formula - are you dividing everything by number of LIRs, so everybody pays the same price? (Now that would be simple :) ).
Share *overhead* costs equally, yes. *shrug* :)
Ah, understood. So the yearly cost would be identically for everybody, and the initial request is billed for "the real cost caused by it". Right? Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279