[members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC, Members and Multiple LIRs

On 19/02/2016 13:25, Daniel Stolpe wrote:
> And the solution was as we know to push
> everything via membership fees and force everyone wanting address
> space (IPv6 or IPv4) to become a member.

As far as I remember, not everyone wanting addresses does have to 
become a LIR, but those who wanted to get services from the Ripe NCC
had to. Whereas there used to be services the Ripe did provide to 
non-members "clients", the idea was every user had to contribute,
and these "clients" had to become Ripe members too and pay the fee.

So, fortunately enought the provider aggregation model still exists,
with a differentiation between allocated space and assigned space.
And so, LIR serving multiple EndUsers used to be and still is the
standard model, I believe.

Yes, shamely but as expected, last /8 policy made the number of LIRs 
explode, everybody nows it made a number of fake, passive, dummy LIRs 
hiding single EndUsers actually, many of them not even having a single
assignment in their /22. This increase of the LIR number is a side
effect, unfortunately, that also led to the decrease of the annual
fee for the reste of us.

Anyway the financial model of the Ripe NCC should adapt to the
internet world's needs, and not the other way round. We should not
maintain a policy allowing to keep a high number of fake LIRs just
because it helps saving the actual financial model.

Besides this financial model could easily be adapted and moved to a
fee on the assigned space (instead of the, so to say, allocated /22)
or routed space (best, because it means it's used). Anyway solutions 
can be found.

Best regards,
Sylvain

-- 
http://www.opdop.fr  -  mutualiser et interconnecter en coopérative
Opdop - Société Coopérative d'Interêt Collectif sous forme de SARL
sur IRC réseau geeknode #opdop - tél: 0950 31 54 74, 06 86 38 38 68