[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 ]
Oleg Zinkov
o.zinkov at kyivlink.com
Sat Mar 18 20:04:34 CET 2023
Good day, colleagues. I also did not understand how to correctly perform the calculation for our LIR. We have few resources of our own, but we are a sponsor for several dozen objects. How is the calculation performed in this case? 16.03.2023 16:06, Dmitry Kohmanyuk пише: > > Good afternoon, my fellow members! > > > I represent Hostmaster LLC, a Ukrainian domain registry. We are > operating in Ukraine and abroad, using dedicated servers to support > our infrastructure. We are 21 years old. Back in 2001, we self-funded > our operations, and never took a loan or donation.Resource-wise, we > have got our /21 PA, our pre-runout /21, two /24 PI of 20th century > style IP blocks (those were our start-up resources), and /48 and /32 > of contemporary century IP, plus two AS numbers; we also sponsor a > couple of small projects with their small allocations. > > > Both proposed schemes would raise our fees, to exactly the same 2200 > EUR.While we can afford them I cannot consider our organization > large.Since the latest escalation of the bloody war by the russian > federation in 2022 we have had to double our network footprint to be > disaster-proof. We aren't making more money either as currency had > lost 25% to the euro. We had to spend some money on generator fuel for > our office and high-capacity batteries for staff and to shut down > equipment in cities under enemy fire. > > > I can imagine many Ukrainian ISPs, hosting, and cloud providers in a > similar situation, or a company in Turkey can be similarly affected by > currency depreciation. > > > Speaking of the second option, consider an idea of a "variable" ipv4 > charge to be impossible to implement correctly.With a cap we are > giving an advantage to large organizations; without it, we may risk > some of them going to migrate to other RIRs thus significantly > impacting NCC revenue. We had decided this once; we seek ipv6 adoption > making everyone request appropriate block at once; what going back in > time is going to do? If we are so concerned about merging extra LIR > accounts we can make it cost more. > > > I propose to vote no on both options, thus keeping the current flat > fee while adjusting it as the economic situation changes. > > > I am also specifically against: > > 1. including sponsored resources into category sizing while charging > for them by their count, as it is double dipping into member pockets; > 2. charging for AS number, own or sponsored, as those are plentiful; > 3. making use of IPv6 charging categories, for the next decade, as we > are still dealing with dual stack world. ARIN made the mistake of > charging more for dual-stack members, thus discouraging IPv6 > adoption; they later "fixed" it by allowing cheaper /36 allocations; > 4. making any fees for changing a sponsor (I am thinking of > everything a fee can be added to, possibly.) > > > Looking at the proposed budget of 40 million euros and way over twenty > thousand LIR accounts (forecasting a 10% drop of them due to mergers > and some reserve for non-paying members) an equal member fee would be > under 2000€. The vast reserves of NCC should allow for softening the > blow of the economic downturn, and dozens of proposed cost-cutting > measures (staff headcount, office location, travel, donations to > external parties, free member events, and others.) > > > I also see a meeting fee is up 14% already. > > assuming some people only get reimbursed after the trip happens, and a > lot of attendees not paying their bill two months earlier. > > > May I suggest an NCC tip field instead on the annual invoice: this > would allow members who feel they benefit a lot but pay too little to > contribute more but on their own will. > > > On a serious note I would like us all to come to agreement on a > formula that is just and fair. Judging on amount of critique on the > list, we do not have this, yet. > > -- dk at hostmaster.ua > > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss at ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe:https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/o.zinkov%40kyivlink.com -- ---------------------- https://kyivlink.com https://t.me/kyivlink https://fb.com/kyivlink https://instagram.com/kyivlink 044 332 9555 093 332 9555 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20230318/e4cb405f/attachment.html>
- 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 ]