[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016

Gert,

In this whole discussion the board hasn't said a single word. They are listening to try and determine what's the way forward. It surprises me that you would outright attack them like this? As someone who chose to step down from that same exact board, I find the accusation that they aren't trying to do what the membership wants, and where aligned, what the community wants, a little hurtful. My experience is that the board has never ignored. 


Fahad.


Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
  Original Message  
From: Gert Doering
Sent: Saturday, 28 March 2015 15:31
To: Hans Petter Holen
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016

Hi,

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 10:53:56AM +0100, Hans Petter Holen wrote:
> On 24.03.15 16.07, Sander Steffann wrote:
> > I was not talking about a proposed policy, I was talking about the 2007-01 proposal that was accepted years ago. It doesn't mandate a specific fee per resources resource but it does say it should be there for garbage collection etc.
> 
> Sander,
> Please remember that thee was a taskforce on the charging scheme, and a 
> change of the scheme by the RIPE GA in September 2012, long after 2007-1.

We do remember. And I should have put up a fight there against the change
regarding the AS numbers, but was feeling too tired.

But anyway, given that the board is obviously feeling free to change
policy-relevant bits of the charging scheme without consulting with the
AP community, I find it even more surprising to read the claim *now* that
they do not want to change this *back*, because it would be affecting
policy...

Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279