[members-discuss] A summary for Proposal for New RIPENCC Charging Scheme Model

Hello all,

 

I think the members forgot several things about RIPE NCC, which has been
pointed out in the Charging Scheme Task Force Report (it seems nobody
read it):

 

1. IP addresses is not goods. Nobody has transfered the rights to sell
IPs to any RIR and nobody is able to do this.

2. From the point 1-> RIPE NCC earn money only for services.

3. Taxation of services could be rather difficult, as soon as the
expenses is not really easily confirmed. In case of reselling (IPs) RIPE
NCC will have to pay taxes for the "goods" (IPs) which the RIR "owns".

4. IPs are for the Internet, not for the companies. Nobody prevents any
company to develop to any size (in IPs count), so thee is not any
monopoly on them.

5. There are many other resources (ASN, PI, reverse DNS...) which RIRs
give. It's not possible to name one of them as main, the others - as not
important.

6. RIPE NCC exist many years. There are many historical principles of
distribution of IPs. Some of them are "legacy space", "minimal size",
"2-year planning"... Many honest companies will be trapped with such big
changes in the policy (for example, when our LIR got our first block the
"minimal size" was /19, we use about 50% in assignments from the block
now). Most tough question is the legacy space which is very unstructured
and companies used the blocks not paying anything for them. So the
counting of RIPE NCC IPs is not very accurate.

 

There are several other reasons covered in the abovementioned report.
I'm surprised that in spite of Leader Telecom representative took part
in the TF, in the list there are thoughts like the company speaker has
not read the document.

 

Regards,

Vladidlav Potapov

ru.iiat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20120715/486ef378/attachment.html>