[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 ]
Arash Naderpour
arash.naderpour at gmail.com
Thu Sep 22 13:44:40 CEST 2016
Well, Those so called small minority have the same right as the others thinking they are majority, thats why every organization has a right to vote. There is nothing wrong with trying to have a level of fairness, while you can spend more time on those real issues :) Maybe 1k Euro is nothing to many members, but it is something important the end-users that recently had to become a RIPE NCC member, to just receive an small block of /22. And the number of those new members are more than the old ones which are making a fortune by selling their unused IPv4 to them. Can anyone from RIPE NCC tell me how many members are holding just an /22? Cheers, Arash On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Daniel Pearson <daniel at privatesystems.net> wrote: > I agree that people need to do a LOT more research before randomly > spouting off about things. > > I spent several hours showing that any change made will not result in a > substantial financial impact as well as others bringing valid points as far > as Legacy blocks, European laws in regards to a market monopoly etc, yet > the vast majority of the people crying for change have produced nothing > substantial. > > As far as I'm concerned if they can't produce a plan, based on reality, > then this is a dead discussion. Things should stay as is, let's move on to > something more realistic, such as the folks getting /29 legacy assignments > just to snag a LIR account as well as folks opening multiple LIR accounts > with the hopes of transferring the /22 into a single account one day. Those > are real issues that can and should be addressed more so than the small > minority who thinks everything in life should be fair and if it's not fair > lets make it fair. > > Daniel~ > > > On 09/22/2016 05:18 AM, Dickinson, Ian wrote: > >> I do find it entertaining that the legacy resource holders that probably >>> have WAY WAY more space than they need and refuse to return their surplus >>> for the good of the internet have objections. >>> I feel this is because their bosses would then start asking if the need >>> it all. They'd then be pressured financially to return their 'cushions'. It >>> boils down to selfishness and not working towards the common good of the >>> internet. Just because you got it when we were careless as an industry >>> doesn't mean you should hoard it now. >>> We should bill legacy holders per /24 and they can then pay for the >>> unused space or return it. The maintenance fees can then go to reducing >>> costs to LIRs with limited resources who are truly optimising their >>> resources so they can afford to buy more on the transfer market. Or they >>> could do the decent thing and rationalise their requirements and return >>> unused space. >>> What does newham council need 65000 odd public ips for? What does a uni >>> need a /16 for? I know one uni I visited some friend at that used to give >>> EVERY DEVICE a public IP. That's unacceptable in the current situation. >>> I even know a trust that has a /20 they use in azure over a VPN that >>> they are using 5-10% of and they frankly said they were keeping it because >>> it was a cheap annual fee. If it was expensive or per IP they would have >>> only kept a /23 and returned the rest. >>> Maybe an amnesty for legacy holders where if they return 50% of their >>> space or more they can stay on the current charging scheme but if they >>> continue to hoard they are penalised? >>> >> Wow. Just wow. >> >> Legacy space is out of scope for RIPE policy for charging and reclaim. >> >> All sorts of organisations have need for addresses that may not be >> obvious from the outside, but that does not make them selfish. >> (This applies to PA space too) >> >> None of this would make any substantial difference to the exhaustion >> situation anyway. >> >> It would be nice if a little more research was apparent in some of the >> items in this thread. >> >> BTW, How advanced is your IPv6 deployment compared to your deckchair >> rearrangement project? >> >> Ian >> >> Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged, >> confidential and is intended exclusively for the addressee. The views >> expressed may not be official policy, but the personal views of the >> originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by >> return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce, >> distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone. >> Please note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communication >> through our internal and external networks. SKY and the SKY marks are >> trademarks of Sky plc and Sky International AG and are used under licence. >> >> Sky UK Limited (Registration No. 2906991), Sky-In-Home Service Limited >> (Registration No. 2067075) and Sky Subscribers Services Limited >> (Registration No. 2340150) are direct or indirect subsidiaries of Sky plc >> (Registration No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this >> paragraph are incorporated in England and Wales and share the same >> registered office at Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD. >> ---- >> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the >> general page: >> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ >> >> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From >> here, you can add or remove addresses. >> > > > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the > general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From > here, you can add or remove addresses. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20160922/125544b4/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 ]