Charging Scheme Task Force Minutes (19 May 2025)

19 May 2025

Attendees: Sebastian Brossier, Victor Bolaños Guerra, Raymond Jetten, Ulf Kieber, Carlos Friaças, Pavel Odintsov

Apologies: Alex de Joode, Alexandru Doszlop, Ivaylo Josifov, Alptekin Sünnetci, Piotr Strzyżewski, Clara Wade, Cynthia Revström

Chairs: Peter Hessler, Ondřej Filip

RIPE NCC staff: Fergal Cunningham, Simon-Jan Haytink, Karla Liddle-White, Daniella Coutinho, Athina Fragkouli

1. Welcome

Charging Scheme Task Force Co-Chair, Ondřej Filip, began the meeting and outlined the agenda.

2. Review of RIPE 90/GM

Charging Scheme Task Force Co-Chair, Peter Hessler, provided a review on the presentation at the GM. It was noted that there was not much feedback and most of the comments echoed points previously raised.

3. Proposal on Legacy Principles

The group discussed the Charging Legacy Space Holders principle in the draft report, particularly when it came to NRENs. It was noted that one Task Force member was the only representative from an NREN, highlighting that there were significant differences in setups among NREN organisations.

The task force had received feedback after the General Meeting from people concerned that there would be significant fee increases for those holding legacy resources, especially larger blocks (/16 IPv4 and larger). The group discussed this feedback since this was a particular concern for legacy resource holders representing non-commercial institutions such as universities.

4. Next Steps

The group planned to finalise the report and have a proposed Charging Scheme ready for feedback and comment by the next General Meeting in October 2025. A vote on the Charging Scheme would then be expected to take place at the May 2026 General Meeting.

To help with transparency, the group discussed asking networks if they would be willing to share examples of what their invoices might look like under a new charging scheme based on the principles. It was noted that the LIR Portal usually provides invoice previews for charging schemes, and there were existing finance tools that allowed users to estimate their invoices based on proposed changes. Adding a calculator to the materials was also supported, with a desire to use real network examples and actual figures to improve understanding.

Given the limited feedback received so far, there was discussion on engaging the membership more actively. The group agreed to send a mail to the members-discuss mailing list inviting recommendations and changes. Members would be given until the end of May to review the draft report, although mid-June was also considered a feasible deadline.

The next meeting was scheduled for 2 June, conveniently after the deadline to submit feedback about the draft report. The consensus was to finalise the draft report on 2 June, publish the final version, and then allow a two-week feedback period before closing the process.

5. AOB

Peter informed the group that he was initiating the Policy Development Process (PDP). This work on a legacy policy proposal would be carried out independently of the task force. He had spent time discussing the matter with Policy Development Officer, Angela Dall’Ara. Angela had agreed to review how each of the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) handled legacy resources and that she would be the RIPE NCC’s point of contact for the proposal. He noted that the proposal would fall under the Address Policy Working Group (APWG).