[members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
HOSTLINE
hostmaster at hostline.lt
Thu Sep 22 11:40:24 CEST 2016
Hello, we all know why there are a lot of new LIR's. Maybe in favor of both (old with legacy, and new ones) members could agree on this scheme: Old LIR's and/or those with legacy IPv4 blocks paying the same amount of money as new LIR's - the current billing scheme, * but if* RIPE NCC recover some IPv4 pools or gets recovered from IANA, they can allocate for LIR's that have only /22 new /22, or /23 (depending on resources avail). Using FIFO model, oldest LIR's with only 1 /22 will get second allocation. Rules could be also that for example, you can't get second assignment in first 2 years when you get first one. If LIR's who has only /22 and never used transfer services, i.e. they have only this allocation of IPv4 they are eligible for second /22 or /23, maybe even /24. If LIR who has /22 and bought/transferred IPv4 - are not eligible. The rule is simple: if you can afford transfer (we now that is buying procedure anyway) - you are not allowed for new allocation. It's just draft, but maybe something could be made on this model? Because now a lot of people registering (2nd, 3rd, etc) LIR's for only one goal - after two years to make a transfer to parent LIR. In such a case - if you know, that even *maybe* you have a chance to get IPv4 allocation after 2 years - it may worth waiting and not spending money, abusing RIPE NCC with paper work on LIR's registration, etc. regards, Simas Mockevicius HOSTLINE, UAB On 2016.09.19 18:05, Tom Lehtinen wrote: > RIPE NCC is currently the only RIR that is not charging differentiated > fees depending on LIR size. > > We all know that IPv4 addresses are shared resources and that we are > running out of available resources. > > Best regards, > Tom > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20160922/2fbfad28/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]