| <<< Chronological >>> | Author Index Subject Index | <<< Threads >>> |
Re: [lir-wg] Re: 50% increase in RIPE fees ? Since when ?
- Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:55:53 +0100
On onsdag, dec 4, 2002, at 09:51 Europe/Stockholm, Bovio@localhost wrote:
In a message dated 12/4/02 5:58:30 AM Romance Standard Time, kurtis@localhost writes:Ok. Notice that this was actually a question on which way you think it will go. I don't understand how you could get "continuing as today" and "same fees and fee structure" to work together.
Kurtis,
Ok, so for next year we will see a staff reduction or a
"re-prioritistion"?
As I wrote earlier we expect the survey to tell us what the membership at large expects the RIPE-NCC to do. If the members indicate that they are only intrested in core activities some restructuring will be required. I personally doubt that this will be the case and I do not think a staff reduction will be needed.
I am now playing the devils advocate so don't take this literal - theI agree with you on the "not only" registration services - but at some point we need to ask us what the NCC should focus on. I can see a number of side activities that will prove useful, but still the most useful services are the registration services, and what do we do if these do not function well?
RIPE NCCs number one focus is to provide adequate registration
services. Anything else is pure bonus.
The RIPE-NCC was never meant to be "only" about registration services. At any rate I do not believe the RIPE database can be considered "a bonus" anyway.
I have a PI address space form that I sent it and that apparently had a problem. That was (I think)I two months ago. Still no reply from the NCC. While registering the new LIR I had a problem with the invoicing and tried to get in contact with RIPE NCCs billing group, I was several times on the phone told that none of them had come to the office at times when I would have expected everyone to be at work since long back. I was told there was a week waiting queue on billing issues.
I don't want to point fingers, at least this is not my intention - and there might be very valid reasons for everything. But here lays a part of the problem. It's very hard to have a view of the work done by the NCC without this being indirectly seen as criticism of particular persons of the NCC.
But I have agreed with Hans-Petter to try and make a presentation for the next LIR-WG of my experiences and what I think, so I will and try to be quite until then,
- kurtis -
- Post To The List:
- References:
| <<< Chronological >>> | Author Subject | <<< Threads >>> |
