RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC Executive Board has closely followed the ASN discussion on the Address Policy Working Group mailing list. The issue of the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme has been raised, so I'd like to give you an idea of the Board's thinking on this. We hope this will inform the discussion and also give sufficient time for members to give their feedback, which we will take into account when making a Charging Scheme 2016 proposal to present to the General Meeting (GM) in May this year. The issue of reintroducing a charge for ASNs was raised at the last GM in November 2014. You can follow the details of that discussion in the GM minutes: https://www.ripe.net/lir-services/ncc/gm/november-2014/minutes-ripe-ncc-gene... This discussion, interesting though it was, did not result in a conclusive outcome on how the membership would like the Board to proceed with regard to ASNs. It also raised the issue of charging for PI address space. Another issue raised at the previous GM during the discussion on providing RIPE NCC services for Legacy Internet resource holders was that members can vote only to approve or reject the Charging Scheme as a whole and they cannot vote on individual aspects of the Charging Scheme. In trying to address the Charging Scheme-related issues raised, the Board would like to make two statements: Firstly, the Board would like to retain the current "one LIR, one fee" Charging Scheme model that was approved by the membership and which provides fairness, predictability and simplicity for RIPE NCC members. Secondly, the Board strongly believes that the Charging Scheme should be aligned with RIPE Policy. For this reason, there is a separate charge for PI resources that ensures alignment with ripe-452, "Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region (2007-01)". With this in mind, the Board would like to offer two different proposals for the Charging Scheme 2016: 1. The Board can propose a Charging Scheme in advance of the May GM and have the membership discuss the proposal. The Board would take the discussion into account before proposing a final Charging Scheme to be voted on by the membership in May. or 2. The Board could take a two-step approach to the Charging Scheme. In May, members would vote on individual issues such as charging for ASNs. The result of the voting would then be used to create a Charging Scheme that would be voted on in the usual way by members at the November GM. The RIPE NCC Executive Board is appointed to represent the interests of the membership. For this reason, we encourage you to give us your feedback on these proposals so that the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 can come as close as possible to reflecting the wishes of the membership. You can discuss the proposal and related Charging Scheme issues on the Members Discuss mailing list (members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>) or you can contact the Board directly at exec-board@ripe.net <mailto:exec-board@ripe.net>. The next Executive Board meeting takes place on 19 March, so we would appreciate your feedback before that date. I will also copy this mail to the Address Policy Working Group mailing list to ensure all interested parties are aware of the Board's thinking. Best regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board Chairman
Hi Nigel,
1. The Board can propose a Charging Scheme in advance of the May GM and have the membership discuss the proposal. The Board would take the discussion into account before proposing a final Charging Scheme to be voted on by the membership in May.
I would go for this option. Let's discuss what we (the members) want and let the board make the final proposal that we then vote on. If we are going to vote on individual issues the result might be an inconsistent charging scheme and it would prevent members from suggesting something that doesn't fit in the list of issues that are voted upon. I think having an open discussion and then trusting the board to come up with a good proposal will produce better results. Cheers, Sander
Nigel, Sander, I would rather prefer option 2:
2. The Board could take a two-step approach to the Charging Scheme. In May, members would vote on individual issues such as charging for ASNs. The result of the voting would then be used to create a Charging Scheme that would be voted on in the usual way by members at the November GM.
This approach is more balanced as for me and it allows to produce the charging scheme proposal that is better reflect the expectation of members. By the way, does the Board have any financial appraisal of proposed amendment of the Charging Scheme? -- Kind regards, Sergey Myasoedov You wrote Thursday, January 22, 2015, 11:03:51 PM:
1. The Board can propose a Charging Scheme in advance of the May GM and have the membership discuss the proposal. The Board would take the discussion into account before proposing a final Charging Scheme to be voted on by the membership in May.
I would go for this option. Let's discuss what we (the members) want and let the board make the final proposal that we then vote on. If we are going to vote on individual issues the result might be an inconsistent charging scheme and it would prevent members from suggesting something that doesn't fit in the list of issues that are voted upon. I think having an open discussion and then trusting the board to come up with a good proposal will produce better results.
* Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
1. The Board can propose a Charging Scheme in advance of the May GM and have the membership discuss the proposal. The Board would take the discussion into account before proposing a final Charging Scheme to be voted on by the membership in May.
I would go for this option.
Agreed. One piece of input for the initial proposal: The ASN charge is primarily intended as a means of discouraging hoarding, not to be a "cash cow" for the NCC. As such, the ideal situation would be that no one (who is not hoarding ASNs) would actually have to pay the charge. One way I believe this could be accomplished is that if you already pay the NCC membership fee or a PI fee, then you automatically get a reasonable quota of gratis ASNs. (Not automatic assignment of those ASNs, but that you won't get a separate charge until you have requested enough ASNs to exceed your quota.) This way, I think that the "one LIR, one fee" approach would hold true for the vast majority of the members. Tore
Hi, On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 08:53:11AM +0100, Tore Anderson wrote:
One way I believe this could be accomplished is that if you already pay the NCC membership fee or a PI fee, then you automatically get a reasonable quota of gratis ASNs. (Not automatic assignment of those ASNs, but that you won't get a separate charge until you have requested enough ASNs to exceed your quota.)
This would work for me. Agreeing with Tore that this is not supposed to bring in additional revenue, and also not supposed to punish/hurt LIRs that make good use of their ASNs - but to be an incentive to return (or trade away) unused ASNs to make them used again, and to prevent useless hoarding which would burn NCC resources. Gert Doering -- RIPE member, and interested in good resource management -- 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 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
participants (5)
-
Gert Doering
-
Nigel Titley
-
Sander Steffann
-
sergey myasoedov
-
Tore Anderson