[members-discuss] Proposal for New RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model

On 17.07.2012 00:45, LIR wrote:
> RIPE is managing a public resource, and usage should be fair and 
> available to all.

Absolutely! And all adopted rules and procedures, described in RIPE
documents, serve to this very purpose. If one doubts the efficiency of
these procedures, he/she is welcome to suggest improvements.

BTW, I wouldn't be so confident that money is the universal measure of
fairness. :-)

> Who is using a lot of a resources which are rare and exausted should pay 
> accordingly, as he/she is using a public resource and others are denied 
> this usage because of him. So the community should have a gain from this 
> concession.

Perhaps, these bad guys should pay not to RIPE NCC, but directly to
those good guys, whom they deprived of resources? :-D

>
> So, for avoiding to have less resources, I should pay the same of who is 
> using 16 times my assignments already from 16 years?

Not exactly! You would pay the same only if you place the same load on
RIPE NCC as the bigger LIR.

Just to illustrate that fairness is an ambiguous concept in given case,
imagine an absurd situation when RIPE NCC is almost exclusively occupied
by processing thousands of applications from LIRs with /21 allocations,
while most  part of the RIPE NCC budget consists of contributions from
the other (bigger) LIRs, which place only a negligible load. Is it fair?

The answer depends on the size of allocated address block, doesn't it? ;-)

> I'm thinking more and more if it is the case to file a case at EU level.....

Cool!8-)
It would be the worst thing you could do for RIPE community.
Just FYI: RIPE NCC service region is not limited by EU, there are many
RIPE LIRs beyond EU. If our discussion were elevated to the level of
Governments, we would get another UN, instead of RIPE. Or many regional
UN, which would be even worse.

Regards,
D.Sidelnikov