[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Dmitry Kohmanyuk
dk at hostmaster.ua
Thu Mar 16 15:03:11 CET 2023
On Sat, 11 Mar 2023, at 21:14, Maximilian Wilhelm wrote: > On 3/8/23 15:14, Sander Steffann wrote: >> >> I feel this model double-charges for PI and ASN. LIRs with many of those resources both pay €50 per resource, and also run the risk of being pushed up into a higher category. I strongly feel that PI and ASN should be excluded from the category score calculation. > Absolutely! This looks like double charge to me as well. > I'm also wondering why out of the sudden there should be a fee for ASNs > - to the best of my knowledge they aren't as scarce resources, not even > the 16bit ASNs. > > So I strongly object to introducing charges for ASNs here and also > strongly object to having sponsored resources count into the number of > resources used to decide which category an LIR falls into (IF this was > considered a good way forward) this is something not quite obvious from the calculator and description -- would like NCC to clarify. Are we going to count other parties’ resources when assessing our fees? > As of today I have to say "No" to both proposals though, as I don't see > how just increasing costs and thereby impacting smaller LIRs (who might > sponsor a number of resources) can be a way forward. Likewise.
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]