[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 ]
Floris Bos
bos at je-eigen-domein.nl
Thu Sep 22 18:13:30 CEST 2016
On 09/22/2016 01:57 PM, Daniel Pearson wrote: > I'm not saying that a discussion is bad, but I'm simply saying that > most of the discussions are being had are not based on fact. > > To my knowledge RIPE doesn't have a list of members categorized by > assignment size, so this is something that someone would need to parse > the RIPE db for, it's all public record so it can be done. Counting all allocated IPv4 each LIR has, and converting it back to CIDR: CIDR Number of LIRs <= /24 1 <= /23 4 <= /22 6051 <= /21 1582 <= /20 1638 <= /19 1547 <= /18 1040 <= /17 709 <= /16 386 <= /15 293 <= /14 134 <= /13 110 <= /12 80 <= /11 64 <= /10 25 <= /9 14 <= /8 6 <= /7 2 IPv6 only 241 If we were to take ARIN's fees as example where up to and including /20 is less expensive than RIPE's current fees, 9276 out of the 13686 LIRs with IPv4 would pay less. Not just new ones... Total income would be similar. Yours sincerely, Floris Bos
- 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 ]