[members-discuss] is the self-assessment model really a good idea?
Frank Louwers frank at openminds.be
Tue Jul 10 14:55:43 CEST 2012
> > Designing a system that not only continues to make the vast majority of > LIRs pay far more per IP address than the big LIRs do, but on top of > that also makes your fee subject to some sort of "insider" knowledge? > > As an employee of a smaller LIR I cannot see how this makes this new > charge scheme worth having over the current one. > > As for the simplicity of this approach, simply charging everyone the > same amount or using a proportional system like APNIC seems far simpler > and more transparent from my point of view, and doesn't add the > incalculable factor of self-assessment changes to the mix of the thing. Exactly my feelings as well. I see only three options: Option 1: Charge by amount of resources. Larger LIRs (in 99.9% of the cases the larger telco's) pay more than smaller LIRs. Some people claim this is unfair to the large ones, as support-load is not proportional to LIR size. Option 2 to overcome Option 1-problem: Charge by amount of tickets each year. Those that have resources, but require no RIPE support, pay less that those that cost much support Option 3: Everybody pays the same The option that everyone is allowed to choose how much they pay can't be taken seriously! If I wouls be a large LIR, and I am fair and choose the "Large" amount, but my direct competitor only pays the "Small" fee, even if he is about the same size as me, is unfair competition, so I as well would choose the "Small" fee. Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20120710/9f161cf5/attachment.html>