Skip to main content

Stenography Transcript

General Meeting
22 May 2024
4 p.m.

ONDREJ FILIP: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's my name is Ondrej Filip, I am the Chair of the Executive Board of the RIPE NCC, and it's right about the time to start our General Meeting.

Before we start, I have a few administrative matters.

I appointed Athina Fragkouli, the chief legal officer of the RIPE NCC as secretary for this General Meeting and she was to kind to accept it because she is always very kind.

Also, I would like to inform you that there will be minutes from the meeting, and the draft of the minutes will be finished two working days after the General Meeting, which is planned to be Tuesday, 28th May, and the members have three weeks to submit a notice of objection to the General Meeting minutes and the objection will be collected using a tool link to the General Meeting page object our website.

And unless we receive a notice of objection signed by at least one hundred members within three weeks of publication of the draft minutes, the draft minutes of the meeting will be final and binding.

And the objection system will be available from the GM web pages from 28th May.

So, that's administrative. I have one more thing for you. The members don't want to be disturbed by photographs and stuff like that, so I would ask you not to use your calm rise, even the photographer is not in the room. Of course IPv4 the transparency we are streaming and we have about 125 people online, but, so we will just use those video cameras but please don't use your cameras. Thank you very much.

With that, we finish with number 1 of the agenda. And this is the agenda as it was prepared by the Executive Board.

We have one amendment and that's point number 7, which is called keep current billing scheme for the next year. We kind of put it to the similar place as agenda point number 6 because we believe that the billing scheme is the same thing as the charging scheme, which was the point we proposed.

So with that, I would like to ask Hans Petter for his report from the RIPE NCC.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: Thank you very much. You have heard me already in the Services Working Group, so that's ‑‑ those presentations are part of the GM, but I thought I would use the opportunity here to dive into some more detail in some of the things I touched upon.

So, first of all, you have heard in the BoF yesterday, and also me mentioning, that the RIPE NCC has a five‑year strategy, and we produce an activity plan that we approve at the end of the year, the Board approves, and then we do an annual report and a financial report based on this.

So, last year, we made the activity plan and budget for 2024 that we are now executing on. So the year plan for how we developed this, you can see here it's part of the activity plan itself, so we know in the spring meeting where we discussed the charging scheme, and then that is set as an input to and set the directions for the activities that we can do. I have heard that there are members that thinks we should do this differently, and we will look into that, but this is our current planning structure. And changing that is, of course, something that affects a lot of organisations

So looking at why we are here, going back all the way to our vision. We're not here to go somewhere. We're here on a journey together to shape the future of the Internet. And I think that's worth to bear in mind. And that kind of frames the strategy that I talked about earlier today, where the community set up the RIPE NCC to support the community, to operate the RIR, and also enable members and community operate one secure stable and resilient global Internet. And for that we need a stable organisation, governed by you, the members, in the General Meeting. And this is really important, that we take this seriously.

And of course, we need engaged, competent diverse staff to handle this. But we are not only accountable to the members; we are part of a much bigger ecosystem. As I said, we are accountable to the community as their secretariat, we facilitate discussions and implement their policies. RIPE members, as a membership based association under Dutch law, that's you guys, and we also need to be very careful to be neutral towards our members and treat them equally, which is increasingly difficult in today's political landscape.

We are also accountable to governments in our service region, not only to the Dutch government and implementing Dutch and EU law, but also understanding the implementations of other national implications that applies to our members. So we don't make it impossible or difficult for our members to use our services.

And then we are part of a system of global Internet governance and Internet operations. And the registry system is an important part of that together with the route services that we also run. It's important to bear in mind that we are part of a much bigger picture than just keeping a list of numbers.

So, looking at our community engagement, the way we put this together is, we need to offer something when we go and talk to the governments, and to be a partner and have a seat around the table when governments discuss how to regulate their part of the world. So, having data and turning that into insight and reports, that's really important to have that as an input to discussions with you, with the community. It's important to see where do we need more knowledge through that we can help increase through training services, and bringing the power of the community together with our ability to produce reports and give insights and training services to the government makes us a player here. This is the way we're thinking about this as a whole, right. Take out one of these bits and it will be much more difficult for us to get a good dialogue with governments and be taken seriously. That's why we have the current mix of our community and engagement activities.

The registry. I have heard, and as I said earlier on, that, oh, we have a declining membership. As I said in Services Working Group, that's not true. Our membership number is flat. It's 20,000 and a bit. And it stays roughly the same. The number of LIRs have declined from the 20,000 and something on top towards 20,000. So from 25,000 to 20,000 over these years. In 2019 in the registry you can see that the number of tickets were really high because we did a lot of manual work in handling and investigating sanctions. So we had additional temps in the organisation to handle that.

Moving forward the number of tickets is roughly flat. But the nature of the tickets have changed a lot. Looking at our budget and the number of FTEs, not much of a change for the budget and the FTEs in the registry. So we are handling the same load of tickets with the same number of people. But the nature of the tickets and the work we do has changed a lot.

Today we are dealing with sanctions and sanctions investigations. You saw in a graph from Marco in the previous sessions that we also deal with falsified documents and that's now sky‑rocketed around the end of last year and now. We are wondering what's happening there.

And we also, as a result of the sanctions screening, we monitor all members towards external databases, and around 15% of the members have changes that we discover and we have to investigate that. And that's around 5% of our ticket load.

So, we are now more proactive and detect things before it happens. And sure, there is more we can do to automate. There was a talk earlier here about ARCs, and yes, we would like to do checks more often than every five years, but that means automating a lot of that process.

And yeah, I mean in an ideal world, we wouldn't have to do any ARCs or we didn't have to do any monitorings because all the members would keep all the data up to date all the time. That would have been cool, right?

There is also a shift in work from members to end users. This is a graph from the article that James Kennedy, my Chief Registry Officer, published on development in AS numbers. And it's much easier for us to hand out AS numbers to members to LIRs because they remember we have their registration data and so on. Than to end users because we need to check who they are. We need to check that they are not on the sanctions list, even though they are not our direct customers, sanctions law still applies to services that we provide to end users. So that's adding a lot of effort on this. And I was asked last year what does it cost you to handle an AS number? That's not an easy calculation, but somewhere between, you know, €150 and 250 a year to maintain an end user, whether it's just a PI or an AS number, that's the order of magnitude that we're talking about. And this is also the background for proposing a charging scheme now that we increase some of the cost in that area. Now, the way we price things and the way the cost is doesn't necessarily have to match but we think it's worthwhile to actually look at this and develop that further.


You saw Felipe's presentation here. We have invested a lot in looking at the architecture for the data centre and optimising that and really reducing the footprint. Some of this we're moving out to bare metal in European Cloud provider, some of it we are moving to another Cloud provider in order to have flexibility. And there is a lot of changes going on in IT and in the fundamental infrastructure, and this is the start of it and of course when we are done with this we will look for other optimisations as well.

So, to go back to the planning. We are now in May at RIPE 88. In June I will have a new Board. You will elect two new Board members. The Board will then give me direction for what to do next year. Then, I will discuss this with the executive team in July, and we will develop internal activity plans, draft plans in August, and then some staff also would like to go on vacation and we will try to accommodate that as much as possible. And in September, the Board will approve a draft activity plan and budget to be published for discussion with the members at the October RIPE meeting, and we have all of November to incorporate feedback for the Board to approve the activity plan and budget for 2025 next year.

So all of you that wants to contribute and give input to the future direction can do that in this timeline here. We will do the groundwork internally and then we will publish this and discuss it at the next RIPE meeting.

So, to sum up how to contribute. Engage in RIPE, the Working Groups, comment and make suggestions to our quarterly roadmaps. Sure, they can get better but we need feedback and we need you to engage with the different activities and owners to keep them on their toes to say, okay, can we do more of this and less of this and here are some ideas that you should work on.

Engage in your NOG's original meetings. That's the ambassadors of this community at large. Most of you are a member of a local NOG or participate in regional NOGs. I mean, go out there and bring knowledge, both from the RIPE meetings out there and back again. That's really important for this community.

Comment on the activity plan and budget, as I said. And also be mindful that changes need to be carefully analysed and implemented. It's really easy to destroy something that's been built over 32 years, and then if we destroy it, then it may be completely impossible to rebuild it. I'm not saying I am allergic to change, my colleagues know that I love change and I think that's great fun to their big frustration, but I do believe that we need to make small changes and know what we are doing in order to get to the side effect.

So that's what I wanted to share with you on top of my previous presentations.


ONDREJ FILIP: That was really quick. Thank you very much. Although it was a continuation of a presentation that was shown recently as we usually do. Now I think I should deliver a report from the Executive Board.

So, now, you don't see it physically you can see the beautiful picture of the talented group. They are listed on the screen from top to down by the order on the photograph. So first is Job Snijders. Second the guy with the charming hair do is me, Raymond Jetten, the treasurer, Maria Hall, Remco van Mook, Harald Summa and Piotr Stryzewski, the secretary of the Board.

Since the last meeting we had four meetings. We usually have a two‑day meeting in December where we evaluate the whole year and also we approve the activity plan and budget, as Hans Petter just previously mentioned.

Then of course we didn't have a meeting during Christmas time but that was e‑mail discussion. Another meeting was on the 25th March and also we had an extraordinary meeting on 6 May because we discussed the current situation with the charging scheme, and you saw output from that meeting.

All meetings are minuted and here is the URL that you can see the meeting.

We approved several documents. First of all, the RIPE NCC activity plan for this year, you know, we requested for feedback. We usually do not get much of it. So that it was the same this year. Although we, you know, incorporated some of the feedback and approved the final version of it.

Then also, we approved the financial report from the previous year, and also annual report from the previous year.

We amended some of the documents and policies. Two of them are related to voluntary resource log and that was the change of transfer of the Internet number resources and change of members official legal name and the second document is independent Internet number resources contractual relationship changes between sponsoring LIR and end user.

And the third document is RIPE Database Acceptable Use Policy. Basically the change there is related to the fact that the queries were accounted for by IP address and we added also accounting for log in by single sign on a service to the query system.

We passed several resolutions.

First of all, we appointed Lydia, Sammy and Meno to the available seats on the community project fund Selection Committee to serve a minimum term of one year and maximum of three years. We also agreed to donate €50,000 to the Rob blocks foundation for the foundation to support its mission. We approved the selection of an investment partner that will manage the investment portfolio, we will get more information on that later. We also approved the risk appetite statement as presented during the meeting number 172, and also we approved the RIPE NCC activity plan and budget with the addition of €200,000 to external engagement and community which was one of the feedback we got.

Also, we approved the amendments to the RIPE NCC procedural documents, transfer of Internet number resources and change of members official legal name and independent Internet number resources ‑‑ contractual relationship changes between sponsoring LIR and end user. I think I mentioned it already.

Also, we approved a resolution of incorporation of a Freezone limited liability company in Dubai development authority Freezone. I guess it was presented several times, but I will have a slide on this.

Again as I said, we approved the amendments to the RIPE Database acceptable use policy. And we selected the following individuals to form the Code of Conduct team for this year's election. So that's happening right now. It's Sebastian Becker, Dr. Omid maddey, Nick Hilliard, Arnold Nipper and Cynthia Revstrom. Thank you all.

Also, we approved the submission of audited financial report for the last year. We approved the NRO report for the last year and published the document. And a thing which is really widely discussed in the mailing list and I am sure there is some discussion will continue here, and definitely after the meeting as well, we approved the submission of the RIPE NCC charging scheme for the next year, and, you know, that's a subject of this General Meeting as well. And we approved the publication of the agenda for this meeting.

So, the resolution about the Dubai kind of company, it was the incorporation of Freezone Limited Liability Company in Dubai development authority Freezone under the name or style of RIPE NCC Middle East FZ‑LLC. The capital of the company is 50,000 dirham, and there shall be 50 shares all subscribed to the RIPE NCC. So RIPE NCC is the only owner of this company, and Hirsham Abrahim is appointed as the first general manager of this company. If you want to know more about the resolution and everything, there is a link you can read it.

So, important topics to discuss.

Of course, the budget for the next year. But that's something we will continue to discuss. But we discussed the outlook of the budget. Also, the way we used country codes, then several concerns about some of the country codes but we strictly stick to ISO list, and sometimes it creates some issues. We continue our action points from the joint APNIC/RIPE meeting which was during the last RIPE meeting. We established a company that was of course important topic to discuss. Charging scheme for the next year, we discussed several times. And also aligning the RIPE NCC strategic objectives with funding.

So, the charging scheme, maybe I will repeat the arguments that several other repeated as well. But just let me summarise.

The charging scheme is always something that the Board concentrates fully. We try to get the input, we run a survey, we run the open house on this topic where we presented ‑‑ as I say, we asked for the members' input. It was a very nice meeting. It was I think in March, if I'm not mistaken. And that input led us to a conclusion to draft the charging scheme the way we drafted it.

On the other hand, once of it published, of it very strong feeling from a significant, I must say, section of the membership, you know, the resolution which now is on the agenda was signed by 700 members. So, we take it very seriously and we understand that there is a large group of members who disagree with the current proposed charging scheme, so that's something we respect and we will continue to talk to them about.

So, we understand that, but, you know, because of the several reasons that were mentioned that we cannot amend the agenda of the General Meeting, we cannot just, a few moments before the General Meeting, kind of introduce a completely new charging scheme without the proper analysis and stuff like that, we decided to keep the resolution as it is.

However, as I said, we understand the discussion will continue. I don't say that the fact that some of the alternative which was suggested by the Board will be approved means that it stays static. We will continue the discussion. We would like to start a kind of task force to discuss which way the charging scheme should develop, meaning not the exact numbers but what the structure of the fees, and let's hope it will be quick and we will have some results soon.

So, again, we understand that ‑‑ we recognise the voice, we take it seriously. It's a lot of members. It's the first time in the history that the members amended the agenda of the General Meeting, that's a strong signal and we will definitely follow on that.

I forgot I have a slide on it, but anyway I think that was roughly what I said. We didn't want to rush something, you know. The worst thing you can do for such an organisation, such an important organisation, is to do something quickly. So, again, we stick with the agenda as proposed, but we will continue and we will have some very solid draft of the charging scheme which will be supported by analysis and documents, we are happy to present it to the members as soon as it's done properly.

And again, there was also more forward looking approach started by the Board, namely by Remco. We also started the discussion about the more distant future of the RIPE NCC, so we don't want to just focus on the charging scheme and budget which are the short‑term goals, but also we started a discussion about a little bit long term changes, and there was a very interesting BoF, and I thank everyone who participated, because there was a lot of very inspiritive suggestions how NCC and the community should move forward.

I just remind you that the ongoing work we are working on is building a stable future for the RIPE NCC. Also keeping in mind the stable financing. We were work with Hans Petter to ensure good information sharing and our engagement levels, which I think works pretty well. And lastly but not least, fulfilling corporate governance and fiduciary responsibilities.

You are always welcome to send some feedback to the Board. We have several options which nowadays, they are really intensively used. One of them is the mailing list of course. I would like to let you understand that the fact that we do not react to every e‑mail doesn't mean we don't read it and we don't analyse it. But, you know, the Board is seven individuals. So to reach consensus takes sometime, so we cannot react individually to every e‑mail. However we read them, we understand the importance of the discussion for some of the members. So we usually act in a little bit slow time frame, but we try to address all the issues. But again, we don't have the capacity to reply to every e‑mail, but that's how the seven‑people body works.

Also, there are special topics when we request specialist feedback, which is charging scheme, that's why we launched the Open House. And it seems that it was not really the idea of the Open House was not very well spread by the membership, because the amount of people who participated in the discussion during the Open House was much much lower than the amount of people who, for example, signed the ‑‑ supported the amendment of the General Meeting's agenda.

And of course, again, as also was mentioned by Hans Petter, the activity plan and budget, I hope that we will get much more feedback this year than what happened in the previous years. So, I'm looking forward to it because I understand there are some strong ideas, some strong statements from members who would like to reform somehow the way the NCC is operating. But again, just please keep in mind we are bound by the Articles of Association, Dutch law and international law as well of course.

We also informally sometimes monitor the chat, you know, the chat was not ‑‑ the telegram chat I mean, it was not ‑‑ it's not provided by NCC, so it's not an official channel for us. Some of us, I mean, a Board member but also the staff members, usually reply and monitor it, but it's not the official chat. So please do not expect that everything that was kind of said there is read by us.

And also we ask for input on specific NCC services, which is usually one reason we have the NCC Working Group.

And again, we are here to talk to you right now of course, which is a very formal way, and I understand it doesn't have to be comfortable for everyone, but we are also ‑ physically attend all the social events, we are there. The mailing list is also there. We organise the Open Houses. And I urge you to attend them if possible because that's usually the best way we can quickly react to some of the ideas. And also, as I said, we monitor some of the chats and so on.

Also do not forget, it's usually on Monday, I meet the Board, kind of meeting, you know, social event, the last time I got one interaction from one newcomer, he asked me where is the toilet? But this time I was ‑‑ I had a very lovely discussion about the nature of IP address, if it's a thing all right or stuff like that. So that was my only interaction with somebody who was new in the community. So, again, please don't be shy. We are there to talk to you. And just approach us. We are very open and friendly people.

And of course, you can e‑mail us directly to that e‑mail address.

Opposition to, you know, kind of test something solid from all the input is complicated. And unless we know exactly what is ‑‑ how the structure of the membership, how all the parts of the membership thinks is complicated, that was one of the reasons we do regular surveys, because that should answer many of the questions and we should know how the membership is thinking, what they want us to do.

So, again, something like that, new surveys, please participate and try to be frank.

That's probably all. Again, I will try to summarise the reasoning behind the reaction to the new situation in the e‑mail that was sent to NCC.

And that's it. Before I will open the mic, I have one very nice occasion. I would like to thank one of the Board members who decided not to be elected any more. He is not candidating, so, Mr. Snijders, I would like to thank you for the service for the amazing three years with you. I must say I have learned a lot of things about you, because you are really a great expert, especially in the area of routing security and stuff like that, and also the way you directed some of the problems was something inspirational for me. So thank you very much. It was great.


JOB SNIJDERS: Thank you all for having been given the opportunity to serve this community for three years in this capacity. Thank you.


ONDREJ FILIP: And with that, I am opening discussion. And if you have any questions, feel free. Also there will be a discussion about charging scheme later. Don't forget it and use all your arguments now.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I am Pavel, I am a candidate for Executive Board for the elections. First of all, I would like to thank you for listening to our voices for the charging scheme and thank you for your decision to form a task force and work on it. And only my contribution will be just to have representatives from members from different types of members from different regions to fairly represent the community as much as possible.

ONDREJ FILIP: That's a very good one, which I forgot to mention. Thank you for that addition. We discussed that already, although there will be a formal Board meeting where we will kind of draft the precise stuff. But we want to accommodate all the segments of the membership, not only geographically but also from the point of view of how they reacted to the proposed charging scheme. So we definitely want to have proportional representatives from all those groups. Thank you for that.

Okay. Thank you very much. With that, I'll ask the RIPE NCC CFO to come on stage.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Hello. Just a short introduction. My name is Simon‑Jan Haytink. I am the CFO at the RIPE NCC. This is my seventh time presenting at the GM and the fourth financial report. All four financial reports I have presented have had a clean opinion from our external auditors. I wanted to give our finance team a compliment. Great work there.

So, let's go into it.

To start off, I wanted to ensure full disclosure. We corrected a small mistake on page 6 of the financial report. Initially we stated we had been 2.7,000 below budget. This, of course, had to be 2.7 million euros. As CFO I am proud that we have been able to achieve this. Something that we could not have done without the hard work and dedication of all RIPE NCC staff.

And we will do everything we can to ensure a focus on efficiency and to cut costs wherever we can. So, we are not done here.

A short recap of our financial strategy. We have a not‑for‑profit funding model and we operate on a cost recovery basis. Our funding strategy aims to generate sufficient income so we can fulfil our obligations in a stable and predictable manner. And we are committed to maintaining a low‑risk profile.

The financial update:

Financial performance indicators. Income was 4% under budget and costs were 7% under budget and we are 4% less LIR accounts than we are budgeted for at year end.

The financial story:

Income is under budget with 1.6 million euros at 38.4 million. Annual fee income is at €36.9 million. The budget 2023, included income from the membership fee at risk with 22,500 LIR accounts. The costs have been €2.7 million under budget and personnel costs have been over with 550,000 euros. Other operating expenses under budget with 3.2 and depression has been under budget with €98,000. This resulted in a positive operating result of €1.144 million.

The positive operating result ensured a redistribution to our members of €1.1 million and I am happy to share that we have managed to ensure a positive financial result on our reserves of €524,000.

This resulted in a surplus before taxes of €568,000. And we have a corporate income tax position payable of €23,000, which is based on our fiscal result.

End result for 2023 is a surplus of €546,000, which has been added to the clearing house reserves.

Contrary to last year we have indeed managed to provide a redistribution. Contributing factors have been the reduced income and less income from sign‑up fees compared to budget. This has been offset by or cost cutting activities in 2003 compared to budget and our efforts to cut costs will continue in 2024 and beyond. On average this meant a redistribution of €54 per LIR account.

Update on banks and sanctions. Our banking environment remains complex due to the sanctions and the banks definition of ultra high‑risk countries. We don't have a solution at this point in time but we continue to work on this issue. Accounting wise we are not allowed to record this income in the profit and loss as it remains uncertain that these funds will actually end up in our bank account.

All payment obligations still stand and have been recorded in our balance sheet.

The balance sheet of 2023, it shows an increase of just under 2 million euros which is explained by the postponed income from ultra high risk countries and the redistribution over 2023. Financial fixed assets show an increase of 6 million, due to a 6.6 million investment in an investment IPv4 by our new investment partner. By the end of the year one government bond reached the end of term.

Current receivables. Here you see the increase is postponed by ultra high risk countries. Lastly a decline in cash at banks explained by the 6.6 million investment and the redistribution of 1.1 million in cash.

Zooming in on the capital and liabilities of the balance sheet, We see the addition of the surplus of 546,000 euros in the reserves. And we see the increase due to the redistributed membership fees. An increase in other current liabilities is again explained by the deferred income from the ultra high‑risk countries. All other items have remained stable.


Total income is at €38.4 million and 4% below budget. Annual February MIPs are there, compared to 23.4 million in 2022. Sign‑up fees at 809,000 compared to 1.6 million in 2022. RIPE meeting income was 17% below budget and other income was 20% below budget.

Member and LIR details. We had 20,000 and 77 individual members at year end. A modest reduction of 154 compared to 2022. 21,570 active LIR accounts at the end of the year. Of which 702 are from ultra high‑risk countries. We had a net reduction of 1813 LIR accounts. We welcomed 967 of new LIRs accounts in 2023 and we recorded 8009 in sign sign up fee income. This differential is explained by new members in ultra Hi risk countries. 278 to LIR accounts closed in 2023. Which is in line with the expected consultation of multiple LIR accounts.

A visual overview of the LIR accounts for our members, which shows two things. The consolidation of the multiple LIRs accounts and the stable member development of the


Membership income 2023. It's defined as income directly derived from the membership. Years prior to 2022 are high due to the sign‑up fee of €2,000 per new LIR account and the high inflow of these new LIR accounts.

From 2022 onwards, this income is lower due to less new LIR and the sign‑up fee being €1,000. And of course the exclusion of ultra high‑risk countries in our income. The increase in 2023, is due to the LIR fee increase from 1,400 to €1,550.

Membership fees at risk. We defined membership fees at risk as fees at risk nor non‑payment outside of the regular business scope. Ultra high‑risk countries as defined by Dutch banks and for this us affects our member in Iran and Syria and of course members who are affected by sanctions.

In 2023, we continued the payment extension for the Ukrainian members and provided a similar payment extension for Turkey who were affected by the earthquake. In 2024, with no longer provide country based extension. We have and will offer the possibility to request individual extensions of which we currently have 86, five from Palestine and 81 from Ukraine. Requests will be reviewed on an individual basis and applied if there is a conflict or a natural disaster.

This way we hope to provide help where it's needed and ensure fees are paid by those who can. To be clear, it's not our intention to close down members. But we want to collect as much as information as possible so we can make informed decisions.

To quantify these numbers. For 2021, we still from €145,000 outstanding as per today. For 2022 this amounts to just over €1 million. And for 2023 this amounts to almost €1.5 million as per today. Overall, this means €2.7 million of membership fee at risk at year end 2023, of which the majority is from ultra high‑risk countries.

We continue to do what we can to be able to be in a position to collect these funds without putting the RIPE NCC at risk. But however we look at this, we have a significant portion of our income at risk.

Moving on to expenditures.

You start with our cost breakdown. Total expenditure for 2023 has been QoE 37.3 million compared to €34.6 in 2022, which is 7% below budget. Main cost for the RIPE NCC are personnel costs with 59%, or 22.1 million of the total costs.

Next in line is consultancy with 10% or 3.9 million.

IT infrastructure is at 10 with 3.7 million. All other categories are 6 percent or less.

Zooming in on the cost variance compared to the budget. We are overbudgeted personnel costs, bank charges and bad debts. All other items are under budget with consultancy being the most significant ones.

Both cost items have a more one‑off character and with that are a little bit easier to stopping spending.

Personnel costs. These are 2.6 percent over budget for 2023. Actual average FTE has been 180.7 compared to a budget of 190.6. Due to a tight labour market in the Netherlands and high inflation we have seen an upward trend in salaries in the Netherlands. We also conducted an external salary benchmark to ensure we pay in lined with the market as we need to ensure we remain competitive with our remuneration which resulted in additional costs and of course we had a regular performance related increases, unfortunately some incidental related to severance and a bonus related to performance.

Next item, IT infrastructure. Under budget with 560,000 for 2023. A clear result of our efforts to reduce costs although IT housing has been affected by inflation considerably, therefore is over budget.

And Felipe, together with his team, is working hard on further cost savings for 2024.

Consultancy: 1.2 million below budget. Another good achievement in my opinion. But relying less on consultancy, does increase the pressure on our workforce. Costs for employees of record are recorded in the consultancy as technically they are consulting for the RIPE NCC. This employee of record solution allows us to hire staff locally where they can work fore efficiently. A decision to use an employee of record construction lies with RIPE NCC management. This is not a decision an individual staff member can make. Please note an employee of record will be offered salaries in line with the local market, so this can be cheaper, but of course it can also be more expensive depending on the country.

Outreach and PR. 611,000 below budget. RIPE and regional meeting have been slightly over budget, training exactly on budget and outreach and PR and marketing have been a major cost savings here.

Next item that has been over budget is bank charges and bad debt with €160,000. Bank charges: €43,000 over budget as we budgeted for 2023 assuming a redistribution. Bad debt, €116,000 over budget due the uncertainty in relation to Ukraine payment extensions.

So, 2.7 million under budget on costs. Average cost per LIR was €1,727, versus average income 1,749. Here we see the average cost of LIR going up due to the decline of LIR accounts and raising costs. But we see the average costs of income being more in line.

Related parties 2023: Related parties are parties that have the relation with the Executive Board members or management of the RIPE NCC. In 2023, we had transactions with these. Additionally we contributed 50,000 to the Rob Blokzijl foundation and the open CSIRT foundation. All transactions have been in line with regular business.

New in the financial report is the section "Other information." We have an obligation to disclose any subsidiaries that are or have been established. This alliance nicely with our efforts to be transparent and gives you as members certainty that we have an obligation to be transparent. The reasoning for the do you buy entity, to further professionalise and approve our presence in the Middle East. Significant steps have been taken but we still have considerable work to do to finalise this project, which ultimately aims to establish a separate operational legal entity in Dubai.


Financial income and expenditure. A better year than 2022. That is for sure. We can report a 524,000 positive financial result, of which 323 is unrealised. We have 268,000 from interest income and unfortunately we had a €67,000 negative exchange result.

Our investment portfolio was valued at €13.6 million at the year end compared to 7.6 million in 2022. One of our government bonds reached end of term in 2023 and a 6.6 million euro investment was made for our new investment partner. Overall a 1.6 return on our clearing out reserve of €32.1 million.

I am happy to report that we have been successfully on boarded by our new investment partner that manges the account. After a long and thorough process, we transferred €10 million to our new UBS account and UBS acts as the custodian account. Invested 6.6 million before year‑end and in February 2024 the full 10 million was invested.

Current value of the total investment portfolio is 16.9 million. On the 10 million investment via our investment partner, we return year‑to‑date is €141,000. Expected return for the full year is 3.6% or €360,000. The scene had make investment decisions within the framework of our treasury sections, which is yearly reviewed and approved by the Executive Board. One priority in the Institute is liquidity. Our reserves must be available quickly in a worse‑case scenario. So the majority of this portfolio is available within a week.

From our investment partner, in regards to the 10 million invested.

Our investment portfolio is assigned for an uncertain world by delivering stable returns through a focus on risk management and consists of three buckets. 60% money market funds delivers stable and positive returns. 26% fixed income invested in a wide range of fixed income products and has a higher risk profile than money market funds. The last 14% in fixed income satellite, they are less sensitive to longer term interest rate and created spreads, with that offers diversification. Eventually do I hope that we can increase the amount of investment, a decision that will require Board approval.

And I think this is a step in the right direction as myself and the finance team are no investment specialists and I have full trust in the seem and the capabilities.


Corporate income tax. Over 2023, we had an effective corporate income tax rate of 3.04%, and a payable tax position of €23,000.

Our fiscal tax rate has been 90% as the fiscal result has remained under the €200,000. The effective tax rate is very low as per our agreement with the tax authorities. We can redistribute any excess funds without the tax liability, which resulted in fiscal surplus of €122,000.

And of course we are allowed to exclude the financial report from corporate income tax.

Capital and liquidity.

A slide you will all recognise by now. We remained balanced and healthy. We have a clearing how the reserve of 32.6 million to responded to uncertainties. The membership fee at risk, LIR consolidation, inflation and declining income remain concern. Our clearing house reserve remains stable, but with the high inflation and challenges we have faced, our cost base has risen, explaining the capital expense ratio showing a decline. However, we are solvent and in a robust financial position. And with that we are ready for the future.

And as you all know we have a charging scheme vote coming up.

As every year, EY has audited or financial statements and provided an unqualified and clean for 2023. Means that our financial statements give a true and fair view and are free of material errors. This means an external and objective confirmation that we have or financial administration in order. I have looked back in time and I can state that we have a very long streak of clean audit opinions. A streak we will work on to continue. An accomplishment I am proud of as our financial environment has become more complex over the last few years.

Before ending this presentation I will provide a short update on the 2024 financials.

An income budget of 38 million and a cost budget of 38.2 million. We expect further LIR consolidation where the number of LIR accounts will match the number of members. This will impact or financial stability. We do see a stable member development even with a slight increase. We continue to engage with our banks to find a solution, to resolve the payment issues for members impacted by sanctions and bankings regulations. But this unless certainty in our service region remains a concern.

The charging scheme is a major topic at this moment and has an impact on the future of the RIPE NCC in our community. I also expect this topic to remain high on the agenda for the foreseeable future.

Payment behaviour:

We see comparable payment behaviour from our members. That being said, we still have 408 invoices outstanding or 2%, which represents about 650,000 euros. 20% of this represents our Ukrainian members who have an extension until the end of this month. Leaving about 324 members who will be eligible for closure based on non‑payment. In previous years, we have closed between 0.5 and 1% of our LIR accounts due to non‑payment, which is between 1 to 200 LIR accounts.

Membership fee at risk 2024: At this moment, this amounts to €1.6 million. €1.2 million for ultra high countries. 268K related to sanctions and 204 related to Ukraine. Overall this means 4.3 million of membership fee is at risk at this point in time. Whatever way we look at this, this is significant, and you understand that solving this is a priority for us. We are doing everything we can to collect in a risk free manner while helping LIRs in need where we can. Do I expect parts of the sanctions in Ukraine will be collectible in the near future. If we were to be in a position that we could collect funds from the ultra high‑risk countries, this could ensure an extra one‑off inflow of revenue. This income would be part of the revenue in the year that we collect these fees. And with that part of the result of that year and included in the redistribution vote.

April profit and loss figures. Income is under budget by €700,000. Explained by fewer new LIRs than anticipated and the income from the ultra high‑risk countries. Expenses are under budget with 800,00 as the first quarter of the year is tradionally slower with costs. All costs categories are currently under budget.

2024, full year forecast. Number is forecasted to be €2.2 million below budget. New LIR applications are expected to be lower than budgeted. Member fee at risk remains an issue for 2024, and we have excluded this income from the forecast. That being said, if we can collect these fees, we will very likely break‑even or maybe even better.

Expenses are forecasted to be on budget as at this point in time I do not see any reason to forecast anything else than our cost budget.

Resulting in a forecast of negative result over 2024 of €2.4 million, of which we expect to be compensated slightly by a positive financial result of €600,000.

RIPE 89 and the next GM.

Please do expect a redistribution vote at the next GM and this could very well be a vote to redistribute the negative surplus or to deduct this from the clearing house reserves. This will have a dependency on the collectability from the ultra high‑risk countries.

Just a short recap of the 2023 financial result. Reremain in a stable financial position. Income has been under budget, costs have been under budget, resulting in positive operating result of €1.1 million, which has been redistributed to our members. A financial result on a clearing house reserve of €524,000, which has been added to our reserves. But we do have legitimate concerns. Increase of income, inflation, market and membership fee at risk.

That brings me to the end of my presentation and to resolution 1. The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC financial report 2023. And with that, I'd like to open the floor for any questions.



ALEX ULMER: We have a question from a remote participant ‑ asks a question to the CFO: "What is the period you keep ultra high risk accounts receivables around? I mean, they cannot be kept forever so I presume past receivables are eventually written off as uncollectible."

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Currently we're keeping them open from 2021, that's 145,000. And at the moment we would be able to safely collect this money we will definitely try to collect everything, but I do not expect we can actually collect the full amount. Well, until, as long as needed. We will probably apply under the closing procedures, so that would be about 120 days after we invoice them and then they will be written off.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: This is details we have not discussed with the auditors any more because because we are focusing on ways to collect them. But keeping them there for more than three to five years, I would find unreasonable.

ALEX ULMER: We have a second question from a remote participant. "What is the rationale for the entity in Dubai? Are there plans to transfer assets to the Middle East? Apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it."

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Well, the intention of that is to further professionalise the current presence we have in Dubai. There is no plan to transfer any major assets to the Dubai legal entity.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: If I can elaborate a bit on that. We already have members in Dubai, so they will continue their employment with the RIPE NCC in this entity. Now, having a separate legal entity in Dubai opens up for using Dubai financial transactions for receiving money and paying bills which may make it easier for us to do business in the region and surrounding regions. Now, we haven't made firm plans yet for what activities we will put there, we do have several scenarios sketched out, but this further depends on tax advice, both in the Emirates and in the Netherlands and what banks and financial institutions in Dubai can offer that the Dutch ones can't offer. Since all banks are part of the same international banking systems and are subject to the same risk assessment when it comes to ultra high‑risk countries, there are no quick fixes here, but we hope that having a separate legal entity, which is the usual way of setting up subsidiaries in other countries rather than just registering a branch office, will make us more robust in the future.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: You had ‑‑ on one of your slides you mentioned an unqualified statement by EY as many of our members don't speak English as their first language, could you please clarify that does not mean they are totally clueless.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Unqualified means basically no comments or they didn't find any material errors that needed to be corrected. So that's a very positive ‑‑ that's a result you want when you get audited. Thank you.

PETER HESSLER: Before I ask a question I want to be very, very clear so I don't get misunderstood. I'm not at all asking about existing members in ultra high‑risk countries, I fully support the delaying of fees for them. There is no issues there at all. However, it was mentioned in the financial report that a significant number of new members were coming from ultra high‑risk countries where we cannot accept fees. However, the membership application process does clearly state once we receive payment and the signed service agreement, then we will activate your LIR account. I was wondering if you could talk about how that went.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: How that went. Well, I mean, we have to treat all our members equally, and at this point in time, it's the RIPE NCC that cannot receive payments from Iran, so that is in the back of my mind ‑‑ back of our minds we felt that we should treat them as equals.

PETER HESSLER: Were they new members or existing members opening multiple LIR accounts?

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: I do not have the exact details but looking at the details there will be multiple LIR accounts.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I am a current candidate for the RIPE NCC Board. I have generic feedback about structure of financially... and when we vote and agree on activities in budget, it's split into key activities of RIPE NCC, community building, RIPE Atlas, C services and for each of the activities we have budget allocated, but sadly, when we see the report from ‑‑ the financial report 2023, it's merged together. We cannot say for sure, for example, allocated 1.4 million for Atlas and how much you actually spent and how much we spent on something. Because in budget, I do understand we need to keep it quite abstract and without going into detail how much we spend for people and how much we had saving expenses for servers, and in financial report would be great to have this information in the same format as we had it in budget.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Can I comment on that? Just as a reference in the annual report on the very last page, we do disclose the financial numbers according to budget based on activity.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Thank you for that. And I have one more proposal. Unfortunately, I didn't find any information in the financial report about main suppliers for RIPE NCC. Who actually gets paid with members' money for the same activity? For example in allocation, maybe some office activities. I think it would be great and very beneficial for the sake of transparency who have this information transparent maybe with some abstract numbers.

Second thing what I would love to propose to engage more members to become vendors and suppliers for RIPE NCC because we all provide lots of services and I think it would be great and fair in many cases to allow members to participate in process how RIPE NCC selects their potential suppliers, and if you can find specialists and skill in some service, we can provide from members it would be great.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Okay. I don't necessarily have a direct reaction to that. I do think we need to be very careful in disclosing too much information of our suppliers as that would put our position to negotiate good prices at risk, and I am sure that a lot of suppliers have a nondisclosure agreement in their contract.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Maybe we can adjust policy to prohibit this kind of agreements because again, we are here for transparency.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: If I can answer that. I did touch on that in my previous presentation and a couple of years back we had requests for more transparency on suppliers and we did report on the top suppliers, or at least the categories of suppliers, but we have not done an extensive survey of which contracts are actually confidential or not. And as was said here, for some suppliers, we do get special conditions, but they are confidential, so with those, if I were to disclose them, I would lose the 20, 30, or 50% discount that I got.

So, yes, I understand your desires for more transparency there, but so far I have not found a good way to do that without losing money in the negotiations.

When it comes to public tender, that is one way to do purchasing. We're not doing that as a general rule. We have a regular purchasing process where we have a requirement to evaluate at least three vendors, and internal checks and balances. I have worked in a company before that provided tools for public tenders, and doing that professionally and openly is a very different way of doing purchasing. And I fear that most of the smaller members would not be able to bid on those anyway. And the negotiations and the framework around that would actually add quite a lot of work. So I like the idea ideally, but I am afraid it's going to be difficult to scale. We have done it on some cases in the past on really large selections, but I don't have a good solution for that short‑term. But it's clearly something I will discuss with the Board and look into.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Thank you for your explanation.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Hello, could you move four slides back on the forecasts table. The last column, the amount of LIRs is forecasted at 20K members. This does not correspond with the slide you made before because the previous column is 21463 ‑‑ 21,436 members. So, that's the number of LIRs. But the very last number is the number of unique LIRs. Why are you forecasting this way?

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: My forecast is based on the active LIRs I expect by year end 2024. So what I'm saying here is currently at the end of April we had 21,436 active LIR accounts. And I expect, due to the consolidation of multiple LIR accounts, this to go down to 20,000.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: You expect 1,400 LIRs will be closed in upcoming eight months?

HANS PETTER HOLEN: I can add to that. I have instructed my CFO to, rather than do his best guessing to do a worst‑case budgeting on that and this is because we are seeing a high risk of income not being collected from ultra high‑risk countries, and after we discussed, we agreed then that we would do worst‑case budgeting on LIRs and budget for the number of monitors rather than an LIR. There is an upside in the forecast here, but we have purposely kept the forecast on the low side in order to handle the risk of not being able to collect money as well.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Thank you for the details.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Hello, my name is Maxim. I have a question about Ukrainian LIRs. Currently, Ukrainian LIRs can't pay legally to RIPE NCC bills because of regulation of National Bank of Ukraine. That's why a lot of LIRs now end up what to do. Do you think about open subsidiary in Ukraine with Ukrainian bank account to gather this money, and this will let these companies to pay legally to RIPE NCC?

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: First of all, on advice to all Ukrainian LIRs, we have the individual payment extension available on our website, so please make sure you request that so we can ‑‑ whoever needs it.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Yes, yes, but the problem still persists.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: I fully understand. To be honest we have not considered opening a subsidiary in the Ukraine, I am happy to discuss this with the Board but as far as this moment, there are no plans to do so.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I want to reply, because I am an LIR from Ukraine and we paid, my company paid through the bank account in Ukraine, we had not any problem. We had a problem with ISP providers who just work on zero kilometre and they, of course, survive, but we have not any problems with the bank account. Thank you.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Tobias, speaking for myself. I would like to address a point of encouraging more membership to provide services and tendering towards them. In my personal opinion, the independence of the RIPE NCC is one of its greatest assets, and I think when making such proposals, it's also important to consider that having competent staff, as we do, that takes care of these things instead of tendering them out to the membership, potentially creating liabilities or conflicts of interest, might be a risk that has to be considered, which is why I personally would prefer the RIPE NCC to have these capabilities in‑house.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We have a comment: "As a comment regarding suppliers' names being published, there is a lot of commercially sensitive information there, so that would be a really bad idea."

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Hi. Mitchell. I was about to say about an LIR from Ukraine. There was a restriction for the payments to foreign companies in Ukraine. It was just lifted recently, and our company was able to pay differently. You can pay as a person and get the company pay you back. But I want to refer to the earlier comment about for subsidiary. Well, I strongly think that opening a RIPE subsidiary company in Ukraine right now would be pretty difficult. I would say we may consider as a membership to open bank accounts for RIPE NCC as a non‑resident company in maybe one or two strategically chosen jurisdictions to facilitate members and non‑EU economic zone to be able to pay with maybe less local regulatory oversight and maybe lower lower banking trust anchors costs. I'm not saying to do this as a measure to avoid EU‑based sanctions, but rather, let's say, make it an economic zone local payment. So for example, Ukrainian bank account for the RIPE NCC company may be pretty viable versus a Ukrainian company similar to Dubai would probably be much harder and costly and, let's say dangerous, to maintain for obvious reasons. Thank you.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Any more questions?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Hello, it's Pavel. My question is: I would like to thank you that you published the structure of investment portfolio of 10 million of euro where our emergency fund cap, but would be great to understand more in what companies it invested, because ‑ or at least have ECG rating for such funds. By ECG I mean how sustainable companies who actually issue those bonds are, and in what industry they operate, because I believe some of the members, they may have concerns about some particular industries. They may not want to see their money invested in those industries. And hearing transparency about what kind of companies, or if companies are not here, just hearing an explanation what is investment strategy, for example, excluding companies in some fields, would be great for transparency. Thank you.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Just I would like to say the team makes investment decisions based on ESG. So if there is the same option they will always choose for one with the highest ESG rating. Also, one of the characteristics of the treasury Institute is to not invest in individual companies because we don't want to run the risk that for whatever reason we have investment in a member. So, they are all general funds and governments.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Thank you for explanation, but still for general funds they have their own rules what kind of industries they operate. Some plans may be excluded in, and again we want to understand more about what kind of those companies, what kind of industry is included.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: I am happy to can you say with the investment partner what can be disclosed, of course they also have their limitation how much of a strategy ‑‑

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I understand. That would be great, as much as possible information without violating confidentiality.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We have another comment from on online participant. He says: "Friends, all the time you say that if we make a flat scale for resources, then you are afraid of missing most of the receipts. But I have not once heard your opinion about the split‑payment scheme. We can collect about 60% of the budget in equal payments and another 60 to 70% with a reserve of 20 to 30% of the budget for resources. If these payments do not arrive, we will not lose anything but the problem with IPv4 will begin to be solved."

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Just to understand the question. In my opinion specific ‑‑

HANS PETTER HOLEN: I think we will say thank you for that comment and the charging scheme is on the agenda later on.

SIMON‑JAN HAYTINK: Okay, that's what I'll say.


ATHINA FRUGOULKI: Hello everyone. My name is Athina, I am the Cheif Legal Officer of the RIPE NCC, and I am here to try to explain a legal concept to the General Meeting about the discharging of the RIPE Executive Board which you are requested to vote on in the resolution number 2. And so, I would like to ‑‑ I'll try to explain what it means actually in practice. This is something we hear a lot, something people don't necessarily grasp.

So, before I do so, I would like to give some background information that has to do with the duties of the Executive Board.

The duties of the Executive Board arise from the Dutch law, from the RIPE NCC Articles of Association, from internal procedures and policies that regulate their work internally, and principles of corporate good faith.

All these duties must be performed properly, which means they must be performed for the best benefit of the RIPE NCC.

If the Executive Board does not perform these duties properly, they are liable. Now, a very good question, one may ask. What is liability, what does it mean?


Liability means being legally responsible for damages. So if someone has damages because the Executive Board did not perform their duties properly, the Executive Board is responsible.

There are two types of liability. The internal liability and the external liability. Internal liability is a liability towards the association as a whole. So, if because of mismanagement or functions of the Executive Board the association as a whole, not individual members, the association as a whole, has damages.

The external liability is the liability for actions that are caused ‑‑ that damage individuals, that are caused by the Executive Board and damage individuals, including members, individual members.

I would like to clarify this. There is not personal liability of Executive Board members with their personal fortune. We're talking about the Executive Board acting on behalf of the legal entity and, therefore, the capital of the legal entity of the association is at stake, not personal fortune of Board members. Of course, there are exceptions. In case of purposefully abusive behaviour of individual members, gross negligence and so on. But these are really exemptions.

Also when we talk about the liability of the Executive Board, we're talking about joined liability of all the Executive Board members during their term, not before, not after.

And of course the Executive Board can be discharged by a General Meeting resolution which is now we're coming to the subject of this presentation: What is discharging of the Executive Board? Discharging means releasing the Executive Board from being legally responsible for damages. And we're talking about internal liability here. So only about damages of the association as a whole, not individual members or externals.

And only regarding activities that are clearly described in the annual and financial report, and again only about the Executive Board as a whole, not individual members.

To clarify: Discharge does not include any actions taken outside of the scope of their duties. Any actions that are not clearly stated in the annual and financial report, any liability towards external parties, including members, and even if the Executive Board is discharged by this GM, it may still be liable for gross negligence or wilful misconduct or absence of good faith in the execution of their duties.

So, this resolution, if this resolution number 2 is adopted, that means that the Executive Board is not legally responsible for damages towards the RIPE NCC as a whole, caused by actions that are clearly stated in the annual financial report 2023, and nothing else.

And in short, in practice, in plain English, not legal language, that means that by discharging the Board you say that their actions, as described in the annual and financial report 2023, have not damaged the association.

I hope I clarified this. Thank you very much. Questions?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Peter Hessler. Thank you very much. This was very informative. Even though I am a native English speaker I thought I knew what "discharged" meant and I learned quite a bit from this. If I could recommend that these slides or presentations gets turned into something that can be more permanently available for us to look at for future Executive Boards when we have to answer the question should we discharge the Executive Board for their actions next year, five years, ten years from now, I think that would be great to have it in our pocket as an available resource.


RAYMOND JETTEN: We have different sizes. Good afternoon everyone. My name is Raymond Jetten, I'm your treasurer and it's the first time I am here on stage in the General Meeting. I am a bit nervous, I have to admit that.

The charging scheme. So, opening remarks:

I want to recognise that there's been a lot of discussion on the Members Discussing mailing list with many opinions expressed and there is a very strong push for differentation between the members. As the RIPE NCC, we feel strongly that this differentiation must remain within reason. And there's also a strong push for further cost savings. As the RIPE NCC, we're committed to cut costs and increase efficiency where possible. The purpose of the charging scheme is to ensure stable and sufficient income, and we have the redistribution vote which acts as a safeguard, which ensures any excess funds can be returned to the members, or if the members want, we can put them back into the reserves.

The activity plan and budget defines the cost budgeted for the activities.

So, a quick recap on the Executive Board meeting we had on the 6th May, was an extra Board meeting, it wasn't known really long before that. The short‑term stability is essential for the RIPE NCC and its community.

Proposing a charging scheme that ensures a loss of 5.1 million is not really good governance. And that is a bit of the liability Athina was just speaking about.

Proposals that could possibly put the RIPE NCC and the consensus model we have built together at risk therefore have not been put forward.

The Board and the Managing Director will continue to work to improve efficiency and cost savings.

And we have already done quite a lot of those.

A structural review of the RIPE NCC will take place, and this has already been started. On Tuesday, by fellow Board member Remco, who started a discussion and we are starting up these ‑‑ what are they called ‑‑ discussion groups where we can discuss about what the model will be, what the funding system should be.

Proposals that could possibly put the RIPE NCC and the consensus model ‑‑ sorry, already done.

The Board and Managing Director will continue again to improve efficiency, like I already said.

And focusing is a stable future for the RIPE NCC where the funding model has the support of its membership. The Executive Board recognises the concerns of the members, all members, and commits to addressing these for the long term.

So, the current focus is only on the short‑term stability.

In order to provide some insights into the financials. This is a model where we have a five‑year forecast based on the current charging scheme.

To start off the assumptions made in the forecast, 20,000 contributing LIR accounts equal to the expected number of members.

Cost budget and activities remain unchanged and are based on the latest‑approved activity plan and budget.

Staff costs increase yearly by 5 percent due to local laws and regulation. And to ensure that we stay in line with the market, there is a huge competitive thing going on everywhere.

All other costs increase yearly with around 2% based on inflation. Some years the inflation is a lot higher, sometimes it's a bit lower. Any further costs cutting or efficiency has not been included, but this is not to say that we will stop working on this.

In overall in 2028 if we would keep the same charging scheme we would fully be out of our reserves.

In a five‑year forecast proposed on the charging scheme we now provide, with the same scenarios and the same assumptions, but with option A selected, the reason for this is quite simple, all the three models will actually have the same number of income with forecasts shown the short‑term stability for '25 and '26. This provides time in consultation with the membership to work a way forward for the longer term.

And to be absolutely clear, this forecast does not include any further cost savings, but we will, of course, keep working on these and save costs wherever we can.

The redistribution mechanism: This mechanism acts as a safeguard for the members. If we have any excess or shortage, the funds will be subject to a redistribution vote by the General Meeting. Ensuring the control of what they will do with excess funds remains with the members.

Please bear in mind that the fund can also be negative. So, be careful.

I also took the liberty to add the story of our redistribution over the last eight financial years. We have redistributed around 60 million to the membership. But, for example, in 2019, we have added 8.2 million to the reserves. That was decided by the members.

Result is also for the responsibility, the charging scheme vote will be proceeded as proposed.

For the longer term, with the short‑term stability in place. We can, in consultation with our membership, review our charging scheme for the long‑term stability.

So, the three charging scheme options.

The current charging scheme cannot be voted on. We made that very clear.

Model A with an increase of 22.58 percent to a fee of 1,900, it ensures the projected income of 41.1 million euros.

Model B increases the LIR fee with almost 21%, to 1,875 euros. And independent resources, €75 ensures that also the same projected income of 41.1 million.

Model C has an increase with fees for 16.63%, to 1,800 euros, an independent resource for €75, an ASN fee of €50. This ensures the same income of 41.1 million. The steep increases are required to cover the effect of inflation. We also didn't increase our cost last year, so those costs are also involved here.

And the decreasing number of LIR accounts due to multiple LIR consolidations.

All the three models are calculated with around 20,000 LIR members, which is equal to the number of members at this point in time. And our expectation for the future.

That brings me to the last resolution, which is number 3. You can vote for 3 options in preference.

Option B and C have the lower LIR fee, and they do this by achieving, charging for other independent resources and for ASN fees. All thee models are projected to have an income of 41.1 million, as I said before. And to be very clear, the acceptance of one of the three models does not define the activity plan and budget for 2025 or beyond. It ensures we have sufficient funds to execute, and the discussion on the activity plan and budget will define the costs for the 2025 budget, and we can, have done so in the past, provide a budget including a positive result. And with that, I'll open the floor for questions.


AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We have a question from Brian story from camel: "Given the purpose of the clearing house cache and TTL need for short‑term stability cash raising, why is the clearing house cash not used? In addition, what is considered as the minimum cash reserve and what are the expected future target minimums?

RAYMOND JETTEN: As a Board, we have the responsibility to be liable, and I don't want to use, and we don't want to use, as a Board, the reserves for a predicted known beforehand minimum negative income therefore.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Lieu hey from Loris limited. I think this discussion has been going on almost every year in the past two years and this time we end up with a solution reached to the same number and we don't have a solution last last time which we don't pay. I I think that's inevitable because what ‑‑ well, we haven't voted any activity plan. My question to your Board member is I understand, and it's been presented at a RIPE meeting a couple of years ago the financial officer has said that because potential decline of member numbers, we will have a financial problem down the road. It has been warned, I appreciate that. But shall we put that in a resolution and say, okay, they say the current activities this is a mandated cost, do your members want it or not?

RAYMOND JETTEN: What do you do if you don't want it?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Well, then propose a solution to it, an alternative solution.

RAYMOND JETTEN: What are you going to do with the budget and activity if it's not accepted?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: If then one activity is not accepted ‑‑

RAYMOND JETTEN: We don't have a budget and we don't have activities? Or what are you going to do with them? If the budget and activities would not be accepted in a yes/no vote, what will be do with the activity and budget then?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Of course the core activity are not optional. It's not optional. But RIPE Atlas and RIPEstat are not, they are ‑‑ we can propose a solution like what you are proposing option A, B, C here, number one keep as a current state, number 2, separate as different entities and therefore different ideas that can be discussed and distributed to the memberships that you can propose the options as you are exactly doing here.

RAYMOND JETTEN: You are right in a way that we have been ‑‑ there has been a lot of discussion on this. And we have also, every year, asked for input on the activity plan and budget. But there has been extremely little input on the budget and activity plan except for we have to cut, but they haven't told us what they should cut.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Exactly. Number one we should start discussion after this vote now in the mailing list, and I will be vocal about it. And number two, you should collect feedback in the mailing list from the members and according to those feedbacks and put up option A, B, C, D up for a vote. That's ‑‑

RAYMOND JETTEN: You'll be sure that everybody would be happy on that?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: If they are not happy they can keep the current matter. They will be an option to say, we'll do exactly what we have been doing for the past ten years ‑‑

RAYMOND JETTEN: They would be not happy with that either. So... what we really would ‑‑


RAYMOND JETTEN: We would like the feedback on what the people want in the activity plan and budget. Before we can set up any type of voting.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We should be ‑‑ we as a member ‑‑

RAYMOND JETTEN: What are we going to vote about if we don't know what the people want?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We are going to vote for each one of the activities do we want to keep them or not to keep them?

RAYMOND JETTEN: None of these activities are connected to each other.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: They are not. So they are independent activity.

RAYMOND JETTEN: They are not.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: So, I have two things to adhere. I tried in my previous presentation to share how we're thinking about these activities as linked, so I understand you disagree with that, but this is part of our current thinking and strategy on that. Looking back in the archives, back in 2003, '04, the Articles of Association was changed so the power to approve the activity plan and budget was moved from the General Meeting, the membership, to the Board, because the organisation grew and became so big, that it needed proper governance by a Board that's accountable and has a fiduciary duty. When we have an organisation of 180 to 190 staff members, and have responsibilities like we have, we cannot do the activity plan or the budget on a popular vote every year.

Now, when that is said, from the mailing list, it is clear that we need to engage better with the members. We did do a membership survey last year. 60% of the members said that the measurement services is a service that is important to them. So, we do have numbers that says that, you know, we should actually continue with this. That's the way I read that survey. And this is part of our current strategic plan. There was a BoF yesterday where we would look at the future of the RIPE NCC and the governance. Remco then shared the current strategy, and what I heard in the room was that it was overwhelming support for the high‑level strategic goal. Now we need to take that further and look into how we operationalise that for the long term. If we want to change things, sure, we will publish a draft activity plan and a report ahead of the next General Meeting and I hope that we will get more and significant input to that now. Bear in mind that if the members or the Board decide to shut down a service that's run by ten staff members, it will take a year or two to make that change, right, because this is a significant change that involves negotiating with staff or selling off that business or something like that. Selling a business where it's publicly known that the company don't want it any more, it's terribly difficult. We have an example from a sister organisation, ISOC, that decided to, you know, give away their MANRS programme. They actually paid somebody 5 million to take it over. I'm not sure that's a good business deal. So, you know, there are solutions to this, but let's not rush into that and I don't think voting on individual activity lines is the solution here, but more engagement with the members before the next year's GM, definitely.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Let me just finish. It's just my suggestion, as one of your members, that I want to vote on each of the activity maybe once every five years, so the activity that we as a member get a vote on. And if members do not be happy about it, then that's a problem they are not exercising the right of the voting because you give us a chance to vote it down and if we voted to keep it, that's our problem, you gave us a chance. You as a representative should do that, that's what I'm saying.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Noted. Thank you.

PETER HESSLER: I do believe that the Board and the RIPE NCC has been encouraging members to bring our feedback, and that if there were services that we were unhappy with, we would bring that to you. And I feel that as members and us as members, as both members of the RIPE NCC and just general community participants we have been neglecting our responsibilities of bringing a lot of information to the Board and to the community and to the Working Groups etc. In general. So, I do want to encourage us to use our ability to bring in information to those who need it.

ERIK BAIS: I would like to express that I do not want to vote on every single item on the activity plan. Providing feedback, talk to the Board, yes, yes, yes. I have the feeling, from my personal experience, that there is always a Board member or an e‑mail address that's willing to listen to us as members. But I do not ‑‑ and I want to stress that ‑‑ do not want to have 27 or more votes during a GM on each and every item on the activity plan. That's a single member that's pushing this up and I do not want to go there.



SANDER STEFFANN: Speaking for myself. I want to thank the Board for putting effort into talking more with the community and listening better and putting together a comprehensive activity plan that nicely fits together. I also ‑‑ that's actually the reason why I stood up. Last year there was a vote that both the amount and the style of charging were both included in one vote. I really appreciate this year that it's just like, okay, we have these activities, therefore we need this amount of money, and we just talk about how that is charged, and I really appreciate that it's now just a separate vote. And yeah, let's talk about the budget for the activity plan.


HANS PETTER HOLEN: Can I remind all the participants here that this is a General Meeting and you are here representing your members, so it would be really beneficial for the records that you state which members you speak on behalf of. Thank you.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Michela Neylon of Blacknight comments: "While I think engagement could be better, it's a two‑way street. Members need to raise their concerns and provide their input. However, as a member, we do not want to micromanage the NCC. I strongly oppose any suggestion that we vote on individual elements of the activity plan."


AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I am representing UA.postmaster. While I would agree with you that we shouldn't have 36 resolutions per activity plan, also, yes, these are interconnected things, there is a dependency graph, and I would just point out that ARIN RIR does have this community feedback, it's basically a Google or whichever, you know, instrument we use, just say, I like this thing more, and they don't call it voting, they call it peregrination, you say this is more important, not I would just like to point out that the AP members do have a fiduciary members and these are people who bare responsibility therefore these people should bare the decisive power, maybe we should have a anarchy‑driven decision process. But we are not there yet, are we? So I would also would like to not micromanage my Board yet I would like the Board to have a feedback loop. Maybe a more formal process when we are members are being reminded what they are being asked about, yet they are deciding about it. They are two different things.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you. Remco has already started this kind of a process and we are continuing doing that. So thank you.

BRIAN NISBET: What I'm hearing is this entire General Meeting could just be a Slido. But what ‑‑ this is a bit of a plus‑one but I want to acknowledge the fact that obviously things have changed a lot in the last month and there was a substantial amount of, in many ways, understandable commentary especially on mem‑discuss and I feel that I certainly and I know other people didn't engage in those e‑mail conversations, so I want to take the opportunity now to stand up and go on the record as saying that no, you know, we don't want to micromanage the Board. We elect the Board to do a thing and that's what other people have said. That there is an understanding that the world is more expensive than it was yesterday. This is a thing. And no organisation that I am part of would be in a situation where each individual members, and all of them, this is the biggest one that we're part of, would have that level of input, or want it. So I think it's important, I think that it's been very clear what's been presented here. And I understand that economies are different across the service region. But, yeah, to say out loud, I think this is the right plan and where you are going to the right plan, and it's good to hear what more is going to be happening, and absolutely, we all need, to we can't spend money forever, but I never got the feeling that the NCC was doing that and I think one of the things that was a lack of feedback, is that it's very easy when you like what's happening, to just go cool, it's happening, I don't need to explicitly say this or I'll say this the vote for the charging scheme or the vote for the Board members. So, yeah, this is me saying I like what we're doing, and it's a good I think this. So thank you.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you Brian.


TOBIAS FIEBIG: Speaking for myself as a personal member. Something that has been said already is that we do not want to vote on every individual resolution and activity. I would like to remind the room that there is also the aspect of that we might not be getting anything if we want to do that. Think of something very, very uncontroversial like, for example, getting free ice cream. If we would only get the free ice cream once we reached full consensus, nobody would get ice cream. With a certain size we need to delegate these decisions so decisions are made and activities take place. It's not a matter of we do not want to vote on any individual little thing. It's also if we do that, if we try to do that, we won't get individual little things, we will get nothing.


AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Cynthia Revstrom: So, last year I spoke for way too long about fees so I will ignore that part now and I just want to just mostly thank the Executive Board for having ‑‑ doing a really good job this time and only presenting charging scheme options which they expect will break‑even or slightly plus. And that won't result in a deficit. Because I really did not like that fact last year. So, I thank you for that.


AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We have two comments online.

"The cause of the members' proposal this year were about from 700 people voted was the reaction of many members because we received three different but actually very similar proposals. This was not okay for many members, not to have different models."

There is another comment from Serbia Dmitry:


"Despite I also don't like the payment itself and the scheme A, B, C, but now it's too late to talk about changing the scheme. These are the rules of our NCC organisation. An increase in costs is now inevitable. I am sure that the problems will be even more difficult to discuss at the next meeting. It's good that we at least started moving to Dubai. The situation that has developed is primarily our fault, NCC members, if we have been ignoring meetings for years and votings."

RAYMOND JETTEN: Yes, I'll comment on the the first comment.

We have indeed three different charging schemes with three different options, one of them has payment for AS numbers in it, we're the only RIR that does not do that. All the others do. Then we have an option where you pay for AS numbers and for independent resources. And then we have one where we pay only the membership fee. So, the intention of having a charging scheme is to get us the income needed for the budget and activity plan. And that's why they all have about the same income in total, because we're not trying to make money here. We're trying to have enough funding for the things we are doing.

The second comment is a bit more complicated, because I think that the assumption that we're moving things to Dubai is not really decided. So, at this point I cannot even comment on that, because there is no such plan.

Any more questions? Thank you.


ONDREJ FILIP: So, the next agenda item was requested by Max tulip supported by 700 members, I don't know if you want to say something else or did this discussion cover everything you wanted to hear? The floor is yours obviously. You think the discussion was sufficient on this point?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: So, as you can see, more than 700 of our members say that the charging scheme is not fit for them. I see that in 2018, the budget was 26 million, now it's, we are talking about 40 million. So it's almost twice, while the core services are still the same, the core services is maintained the RIPE Database. So people are afraid they need to cut some budget. And my question is how to vote, how to make the previous charging scheme to be extended until next year? As I understand, it's too late to do these changes right now, at this meeting. But probably the Executive Board can do this next meeting in the autumn, so we will manage to do this vote before the next year starts. So, I kindly ask Executive Board to find some way to vote for this proposal, maybe next meeting, not this meeting. Thank you very much.

ONDREJ FILIP: Thank you very much. I absolutely understand the will of $700 people, and we will respect it and I told you we will try to address all the issues that were raise because they were of two kinds: One is the general dissatisfaction with the size of the budget, and that's a fair comment which I'm sure will be kept for the activity plan and budget discussion. And the second was also the distribution of the fees. You know, so, there are two different issues, and especially the second one is something we would like to address with the task force, the people who initiated and were active in this path, you know, who really kind of work on this proposal, they were active, they will have a big part in the task force, so then we can discuss.

But I can tell you immediately here that we will definitely not propose the charging scheme from the last year, because, you know, that's what we explained why we cannot do.

Any other questions or comments on this point?

ERIK BAIS: We have had some presentations today, Address Policy, and yesterday from James, also about the AS numbers and AS numbers being for free being used. There is a huge amount of numbers that are being used for personal training, research, stuff like that. And the NCC, specifically the registration desk, has issues reclaiming unused AS numbers. I, as a member of Address Policy, and also as a co‑Chair of Address Policy, has seen the requests for methods in the charging scheme in the past for a charge for AS numbers. I am glad it's in the charging scheme options, it's option C, and I would definitely advocate for the option to at least see how this will end up and have a small upkeep charge for the AS numbers and provide the NCC with at least some way to reclaim them or at least provide some insight on that. So I think the charging scheme as we have it, you know, it's all the same budget, at the bottom of the line, but it will help us, you know, to see if this will actually help this operational problem. That's what I wanted to say. So I would say go for C.


ONDREJ FILIP: Thank you very much. The input from the Address Policy Working Group was, of course, important for the members so it was definitely heard. Thank you very much.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I am from the Ukraine, I speak for myself. I want to demonstrate especially for you one voice. I just want to remind for all of you that there is a war going on in Ukraine and in the heart of Europe. And this sound means that missile attacks on Ukrainians has started. And it means when they ended we should go to renovate our networks again, again and again. We work hard under very difficult conditions. We do all the best to provide connection on the Ukrainian segment of Internet to the world. We appreciate the RIPE NCC provide postponement of payment for Ukrainians ISPs, and we try to pay on time, but of course for the ISP provider who continue working on the frontline territories, it is a real ‑‑ very important. They have less of money and they just survive. And I hope you make the same decision next year.

Regarding charges, changes in charging scheme, I am sure this should not be a fast decision. Of course Ukrainian community can join to the discussion, but of course we have little bit other goals now. I'm sorry.

Also, I want to thank everybody who continued to help to ‑‑ who continued to take part in keep Ukrainian connected project and support Ukraine. Thank you very much.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you very much.


AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Thank you, I'm John Jack owe from Hungary. I would like to remind the membership that we had ‑‑ we were asked by the members a couple of years ago to have the charging scheme sorted out in the May AGM in order for the members to be able to prepare themselves for the next year. Therefore, I think it wouldn't be too wise to have a new charging scheme voted on in October, end of October or November. So, I would recommend to keep it decided this GM. Thank you.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you very much.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: I would like to ask a question to the Board whether the Board is prepared or the Board and the senior management have the plan, when the membership will clearly express the opinion that the budget should be cut, like first 30 million euro or maybe to 20 million euro, whether the Board has this idea in mind?

RAYMOND JETTEN: Well, the Board already commented to cuts in the budget and I think it was clearly presented by Hans Petter. Of course, if you will say 20 million, that's not realistic, especially not for the next year. So no, I can't comment because that's something I would never do. It's impossible. But of course we will absolutely respect the will of the members and especially if they tell us which activities should be closed or maybe the quality should be, you know, lower than I think that's the way we can discuss. But radical change in an organisation, 60% of the budget are salaries, that's just impossible. So no, I cannot do impossible. I'm not...I apologize. Definitely we will respect the kind of guidance from the membership.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Just a quick comment. I like the new website design and I just want to propose that with link, the supporting the documents into the agenda of the General Meeting because, you know, it's kind of hard to find it to the menu/supporting document/charging scheme. I know it's simple but I'd just like to mention that so the members know what exactly they are voting for can have is linked. That's all I want to say. And I do support the comments, but that's because I am from Ukraine too. Thank you very much.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you very much and we took that note. We will fix it it for future. Pavel?

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: As one of the charging schemes, one thing which is quite missing, we tried to charge a number of ASN numbers, we tried to introduce different schemes with change as companies gross, but win the changes which I say is missing and unfortunately we cannot action before this scheme to understand it more, to understand how much it actually cost for the RIPE NCC to do every single activity regarding every LIR account, how much it cost to do transfer, how much it costs to do onboarding, we got some numbers from Hans and I would like to know about extraordinary expensive way having resources. And it's clearly obvious that we need to increase prices, but if we can get more information and basically put price tag to many activities we have, like if we are getting more tickets you have to pay for it, just to understand how much in general every single member costs us and if we can find outliners we may find the way how it can be introduced within the charging scheme.

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you very much. Let me just explain on that. The Board always tried to create or to construct the charging scheme on some predictable things. If we will charge per transaction and then do a number of transactions, really low, then we can get into trouble. So that's why we always try to stick the charging scheme with something which is predictable which, you know, ensures the financial stability of the association. But I understand your point and we will try to be as transparent as possible, I don't know how quickly ‑‑ I don't think we can say that every ticket costs something but we will try to find some more numbers on that sure.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Online comments:

"Maybe members can participate in RIPE projects on a voluntary basis, in this way they feel more involved and we can even reduce costs as they will not be paid as internal employees or external consultants. This can be a win‑win situation for everyone."

RAYMOND JETTEN: Thank you very much. Sure, that's an option, but the experience we have from different organisations is that at the beginning you have a lot of volunteers, but at the end of the day everyone needs to pay his/her mortgage so the activity lowers during the time. I don't think we can build a proficient organisation just based on the volunteers, we have great volunteers here that run the RIPE meeting for us and we are thankful to them but I don't think running the organisation itself would be a way forward. But thank you for the comment.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: If I may add to that. We do use OpenSource software in several areas of the operations, for instance for running K‑root. We do, however, not think that that means that that software is free, so we do pay for support contracts with the companies that develop this software to make sure that the programmers that actually write the code gets money for food and, you know, a house to live in and so on. So, I love volunteer work, I work in several volunteer organisations myself, folk dancing, folk music and stuff like that. But I also recognise that, you know, when young professionals come in, in the sessions today, they want to make a living of this, and that's why I pay my staff to do the job, right. And replacing staff with volunteers, sure we can do that in some ways, you can participate in the Working Groups, you can give input and come up with ideas, you can be Working Group Chairs in the RIPE community, part of the Programme Committee meeting, at MENOG, etc. There is a lot of voluntary work that can be done that really helps us. You know, when I started in this community, the community members did scribes for the Working Groups. I was put in to make the minutes of the Database Working Group at my first meeting. Today, the RIPE NCC provides staff to do that, right. I mean, we welcome volunteers to come back and do more work, that would be great, the opportunities are here.


TOBIAS FIEBIG: I hear many of my fellow members arguing about going back to the old charging scheme, going back to an old budget of 20 million or 30 million, going back, going back, and we earlier had Randy Bush say he would love to live in the '90s again and have the Internet of the nineties, but acknowledging that that won't happen. Time is an arrow and that arrow only goes one direction. If you figure anything out to make it different, we'll probably a physics Nobel price committee is a better avenue for that than a RIPE meeting, because that won't happen. Time does not go backwards and we have to deal with that and repeating over and over again that we want to go backwards won't make it so.


RAYMOND JETTEN: I think that is really a nice final discussion point. So with that, I suggest to close this point and move in the agenda. The next point is election, is it? Yes, elections, I was right.

So, first of all, thank all the candidates for enabling us to participate. Thank you very much. We had an Open House where members could ask them, and you asked, so it was interesting to watch. And now we will see videos of every candidate, but before we do that, let me read the names of the candidate.

So first is Osama Al‑Dosary, he is here, especially if you want to ask him something, there is still a chance.

Then we have Sander Steffann, again, a well‑known person in the first row here, so the same applies.

Piotr Strzyzewski, current Board member is there.

Then we have Pavel Odinstov, he is here. So I'm sure you noticed him.

Then we have Artem Isbaeyenkov. Unfortunately, he couldn't travel here so he is not here. I don't know if he is remote. But definitely in his biography there is contact information so you can contact him if you have any other questions.

And last but not least, Alexj Volodin who couldn't be here with us.

With that I think we can start the videos of the candidates, right.

(Videos then played.)


ONDREJ FILIP: That you know very much again, we are lucky we heard it twice.

We suggest a five‑minute break to sort the technical breach. Once it's fixed we will reconvene. Give us five minutes please.


ONDREJ FILIP: Lady and gentlemen, we have solved the issue, so I will wait a few more seconds for others to again reconvene. We apologise for this break. I hope this is the last one. But you know we all just work with technology, so it breaks sometimes.

So again, please, if you can sit down, we will continue in a few seconds: So, again, I apologise to Osama, but we have heard his message and we can see his face in natural, so that's probably okay and we will continue with the other candidates. Thank you.

(Videos are then played.)



ONDREJ FILIP: So you saw all the candidates, so now you can decide and please before that, let me acknowledge them, because it needs some bravery to stand in front of people and saying I will be a candidate. I know it from my experience. So again, guys, thank you very much for your candidacy.

Also let me acknowledge the technical creative solution, especially the audio connection was world class, thank you very much for the improvisation.

Before I will read the resolution, I was informed by Ulka that we forget to read one of the comments, so, I would like to have it read.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: We have a comment from Dmitry saying: "About budget economy, maybe we should do a survey among all RIPE NCC members, what do they want, to pay less and not have access to scarce resources or to pay more but to have access to scarce resources?"

We also have a comment from Sebastian, saying: "A suggestion for the next GM, if you have videos of candidates, upload first, give members the URL and the time slot during the GM to watch instead of streaming bad audio and a waste of time."

ONDREJ FILIP: I will not comment the second one of course, we understand that this was all a bit of an unpleasant situation. On the first comment, we'll run the survey so we are happy to continue this practice and we'll try to collect the feedback as mentioned.

So with that, I think Karla is next, right?

KARLA WHITE: I am from the communications team at the RIPE NCC and I am going to take you through the voting platform and procedure. I have managed to make this 27 slides, I don't know how, but I'll try and be quick with the interlude.

Here we go.

Let's start with some numbers. Let's do administration first, I forgot that bit.

So in line with the Articles of Association, the Chair of the General Meeting decided that voting would take place at this GM will be electronic only and no paper ballots.

Now the numbers.

So, for this General Meeting, we had 2001 votes registered from 19,746 eligible members.

What does that mean? That means a voter turnout of 10.1% at this GM, which correlates a bit from the October 2020 to the May 2022 kind of timeline. And then per country, we have got Germany, Russia, UK and the Netherlands at the top there, and then shout out to Poland because that's where we are. All of these slides are on the website if you'd like to take a look at these numbers.

So, the resolutions.

There are three to be voted on. The first two requires more than 50% of the yes votes to pass. And then resolution 3 is using instant run‑off voting. Please note that abstentions are noted but do not count.

I will be saying that a lot throughout this presentation.

So, the Executive Board election: There are six candidates as you saw. To fill two seats. We are going to use instant run‑off for that one as well and we are going to be ranking the candidates. So you must choose at least one candidate on the ballot for it to be considered or you can abstain. And you must number them in order of preference. I have got some images in a minute to show you what that looks like on there. Again abstentions are noted.

So, instant run‑off voting. I am going to try and explain this the best I can.

So voters rank the candidates in order of preference. And it's preferential, where candidates have to receive more than 50% of the top preference votes to be elected. So, I have kind of tried to break this down a bit. So you rank the candidates. So you are going to rank them first, second, third, etc. And then the system counts the votes and then in the first round, the first choice votes are counted, the first election winner is the candidate with more than 50% of those first choice votes. Then the system eliminates. If there is no candidate that receives more than 50 in a voting round, the candidate with the fewest top‑preference votes is eliminated. Then it redistributes and it recalculates in the order of preference. Then that process repeats until we have got the top choices for the top candidates.

If that made no sense, we have a lovely video on the website that you can watch at your own leisure.

How to vote. By now you should have received two mails in your inboxes. The first one contains your voting code 2, that's you your GM registration number. You need that to log in to the voting platform.

Then you have got another e‑mail in your inbox that has the link to the election platform. This also has voting code 1, but that should be pre‑filled. So you shouldn't have to worry about that one. You just have to click vote now.

And then that takes you to the platform. Code 1 is pre‑filled. You just need to add your voting code 2 and hit go to ballot.

Voting timer. I got some questions last, I think at the autumn GM, about this timer. So basically the timer begins when you open the platform and you have 40 minutes to complete the process. But, if you leave the platform and then come back, that timer just starts again. It doesn't mean you have got 40 minutes forever. It's ‑‑ it will come back if you exit the browser and come back again.

So, how to vote:

You have logged into the platform. You are on resolution 1.

Now, resolutions 1 and 2 you can choose, yes, no or abstain, but you must choose one option to continue. So, confirm your selection.

Now, if you have several votes, as I know many of you do, you can assign them using those little arrows there and then in each of the boxes if you have got 20 votes and you assign 15, if you confirm and cast, it will ask you to then to do the next ones.

Click continue once you have got it all. The green bar will come up. If you haven't assigned all your votes it won't let you continue. And then resolution 3, also uses the instant run‑off voting system. So you can rank 1, 2 or 3 or you can choose to abstain. Again if you have got several votes you can assign them using the little arrows in the drop‑down and confirm and cast. Once you have done all of your votes, click continue.

The Executive Board election. Again uses instant run‑off voting. You rank the candidates, you choose as many as you like. You can choose one candidate if you'd like or you can rank them all or you can choose to abstain.

And then click continue, repeat until you have signed all your votes.

So, then you will then be shown all the voting selections for all the resolutions and the election. Check your votes, check they're all correct, and then submit your vote.

Now it's optional but you can track your vote. If you type down that number or you can take a photo of the QR code or just go to the QR code it will open up the track‑your‑ballot page which looks like this. And then you can have a look and track what the ballot history is on that page.

Important information:

You need to complete the entire voting process for your vote to be validated. So if you come out of the browser halfway through, you haven't cast your ballot, so make sure you go through the whole process and get the receipt at the end. To receive the emails from assembly voting your server does need to be TLS 1.2 compliant.

Tracking pixel. In the autumn GM, Randy Bush, I know you are watching, asked about the tracking pixel so I went away and had a look, there obviously is one. This is to track the opening of the voting e‑mails. So we only use this information to send that reminder because it's probably going to be quite annoying if you have voted and you get a reminder. Assembly voting does not use this information for anything else. And again, as I said at the start, there are no paper ballots at this GM.

Troubleshooting. If you have not received your e‑mails by 7 p.m. Polish time, please contact us at [email protected]. If you are on‑site I'm going to be reregistration desks so ask for me, I'm Karla, or just ask for the GM organisation team and we can help you out. I'll be there from 9 until 6. And the e‑mails come from "no reply," so please check your spam for that e‑mail. And if you are using Safari on the mobile, the pre‑filled code doesn't always appear, but it is in the e‑mail so you can copy and paste it. And please be aware that Internet Explorer cannot be used to access the system.

So for any questions, please come to me or e‑mail [email protected] and we're here to help.

The results: So voting can take place once the Chair declares it open. Gives it a few minutes because we have to get the system going after he says it. And votes can be cast until 9 a.m. UTC plus 2 on Friday, 24th May. And we will announce them on the live stream, which you should have got a link with the Meetecho link, and will be announced in here in the main room.

So, kind questions only because it's my birthday.

Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, hard copy birthday deer Karla, happy birthday to you!

PETER HESSLER: Happy Birthday. You mentioned there is a 40‑minute timer, can you say what happens if that timer runs out?

KARLA: Like any timed browser it just stops so you can't move on.

PETER HESSLER: Does it save your ‑‑ you have to restart?

KARLA: No, you have to restart unfortunately.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Peter Koch, first of all, happy birthday. And a lot of other birthdays to come. I don't have a question, I have a request. And I have had the request a couple of times before so it's all not your fault. And instead I could have probably provided a video as well. But then, the request is about the slide with the demographics of the registered votes. I don't understand what the NCC is trying to tell us with this. The country and the number per country is maybe interesting, but there are lots of other aspects, and even though this is the May meeting, and we usually have a proximity to the Eurovision song contest which might have inspired this, I do think two things:


First of all, if this is to inform the community, then I would like to know what I'm supposed to be informed about by seeing this before the votes are cast. If it is for an analysis, which could be interesting, then the sheer number of votes per country that are registered is probably less interesting as putting this in comparison to the LIRs per country showing demographics of the "Age" of the member or other things. So my request for clarification is: What the hell is this about? And if it's not important, then strike it or ‑‑ and I do think we need these demographics so they could inform the process, but then, first of all, it should happen afterwards, and that's it. And next time, video promised.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: Thank you for the feedback. I am considering to propose to the Board to start a task force to address that issue.

PETER KOCH: Not without having a process for that, Hans Petter.


AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Thanks again for the explanation. Just to add some clarity, the key word in rank choice voting is choice. It's not like rank everything 1 to N. Rank choice vote is still a vote so don't vote for something that you don't want to see. Like specifically in the Board candidates, if there is a candidate that you would prefer not to see on the Board then leave is blank. Thank you.

AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Lars Liman. I am just curious about that tracking code on QR thing at the end. What exactly should I expect to happen to my vote after it's been cast so that I need to track it?

KARLA: It's literally a receipt to say that you have got it and it's been done. Also, if anything happened with your vote, it would appear there. So it's for you to know that your vote has been cast and nothing else has happened.

Thank you very much.

ONDREJ FILIP: Thank you very much. Before I will read the resolution I was told that I cut off somebody from the microphone. I think it was Tobias or something, is it solved already? I apologise I couldn't see you. So it's done, thanks.

So, I have the last agenda item and that's the voting on the resolutions.

So, let me read all the resolutions.

Resolution number 1: The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC financial report 2023."

Resolution 2: "The General Meeting discharges the Executive Board with regard to its actions as they appear from the annual report 2023 and financial report 2023."

Resolution 3: We have three options:

Option A: "The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC charging scheme 2025 model A)

Option B says model B.

Option C says model C. I will not read it if you don't mind.

And then we have Executive Board elections. So, the RIPE NCC Executive Board election is to fill two seats. There are six candidates, the list is here.

So, please choose two of them.

And with that, I don't see any other comments, so, let me declare that the voting is open.

And the General Meeting will reconvene on Friday, at 10:30, local time in this room I guess.

Excellent, so see you on Friday and we will see the results. And thank you very much for your very helpful input.