Re: [ncc-services-wg] Re: dnsmon / .org

[Andreas Bäß/Denic <]

Daniel,

> However it is very difficult to do it for some for free and
> ask the others to pay.  So doing that may lead to a situation where the
> RIPE NCC membership ends up paying the whole bill.  I would actually
> like that because it makes the measurements  even more independent
> and I would not have to invest time into making agreements with the TLD 
> admins, billing, etc.  pp.

from our (DENIC) point of view an independant professional monitoring
of our services has value and we certainly will pay a fair share 
to continue this service. Monitoring other parties that are not able
to pay for that (maybe unwanted) service is nonetheless of value
for us too, as we are often contacted to explain anomalies or to
make judgements on explanations/justifications where independant
monitoring is better than believe/rumors ;-)

> But is this acceptable to the RIPE NCC memebrship in the long run?

I think the system has enough options to provide to those who pay
more and better service (realtime vs. delayed data access,
access to single monitor point data vs. only overview, breakdown
so single minute measurements vs. 15 minutes overviews or just events,
maybe complex alarming conditions).

Have a nice day
Andreas