Discussion on Charging Scheme 2010 Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

History – Reasoning for Charging Scheme Initially 1994-1997 – Flat fee (self declared category) Change in 1997- Fee based on algorithm reflecting services rendered from the RIPE NCC Change in 2004 – Expansion of number of categories from 3 to 5 to better reflect different member size Over the years model changed moderately to reflect policy changes (Initial allocation, Direct Assignments) Direct assignments scored over time in 2004! The NCC would design an algorithm to determine a registry's size and therefore minimum charging category. The algo- rithm would be a simplified version of the model See also ripe-143, ripe-145, ripe-187, ripe-198, ripe-213, ripe-226, ripe-255 algorithm with three size categories. The fees must be set so that any cross subsidies are kept at an absolute minimum. Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

Scenarios Current Charging Scheme Scenario with recurring Fee per individual Direct Assignment Scenario with recurring Fee for Direct Assignments Base for scenarios Membership and Resources numbers of mid April 2009 Service Fees remain the same as 2009 Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

A. Current Charging Scheme One fee for all RIPE NCC Services Five categories XS/S/M/L/XL A score determines what category a member has Score based on Internet Number Resources over time All Internet Number Resources are scored Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

B. Scenario with Fee per Direct Assignments Separate fee for Direct Assignments Five categories XS/S/M/L/XL A score determines what category a member has Score based on PA IPv4 & PA IPv6 over time Direct Assignments have a recurring charge per assignment Scenario 1 – 50 EUR per DA and 2 – 100 EUR per DA Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

C. Scenario with Fee per Direct Assignments Additional fee for Direct Assignments Five categories XS/S/M/L/XL A score determines what category a member has Score based on PA IPv4 & PA IPv6 over time Direct Assignments have a recurring charge for assignments based on a grouping No of DA Fee 1 50 21-30 750 2-5 100 31-50 1,500 6-10 200 51-100 2,500 11-20 400 +100 4,000 Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

Scenario overview In million EUR Scenario A Scenario B1 Scenario B2 Scenario C Revenue 12.1 12.3 Additional Revenue - 1.35 2.7 0.8 Maximum fee in kEUR 5.5 50 95 9.5 Top 10 fees in kEUR 17 - 50 32 - 95 8.1 – 9.5 >50% Fee increase 3% 6% 2% In # >50% Fee increas 162 367 111 Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

Strategic & future considerations Or “Grand new charging scheme” Revise charging model more drastically to reflect current and possible future changes ….. For instance what is the impact of IPv4 depletion on the Charging Scheme? Will it still be a valid, fair system? Also think about transfers how will they impact the current charging scheme and will the charging scheme still reflect a fair system in relation to the services received from the RIPE NCC? Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam

Questions ? & Discussion Jochem de Ruig 6 May 2009 / GM / Amsterdam