On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> arin forcing folk to sign
> contracts with clauses saying arin can change the Ts&Cs unilaterally and
> arbitrarily, ...
>
Exactly! -- Jay
>> Yeah, RIPE NCC is definitely much cheaper for PI: no initial
>> registration fee of ≥$500. The maintenance cost is $100/year vs
>> €100/year (±$137) so there is a little difference there. The $37
> €50 per PI assignment from the ripe ncc, no?
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-591
guys, you a
Oops. /me was confused. €50 indeed!
Met vriendelijke groet,
Sander Steffann
> Op 28 mrt. 2014 om 15:20 heeft Nick Hilliard het volgende
> geschreven:
>
>> On 28/03/2014 14:03, Sander Steffann wrote:
>> Yeah, RIPE NCC is definitely much cheaper for PI: no initial
>> registration fee of ≥$500. T
On 3/27/14 6:42 PM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
>nanog is a separable game. it is currently very confused between form
>and substance, making committees for everything. like the bcop thing.
>two organizations, nanog and isoc, forming organizational structures to
>create a document store. the ops' do
On 28/03/2014 14:03, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Yeah, RIPE NCC is definitely much cheaper for PI: no initial
> registration fee of ≥$500. The maintenance cost is $100/year vs
> €100/year (±$137) so there is a little difference there. The $37
€50 per PI assignment from the ripe ncc, no?
http://www.r
Hi Owen,
> Compare and contrast the costs of being a PI holding end-user in the RIPE
> region to those in the ARIN region and the difference becomes much more
> noticeable.
Yeah, RIPE NCC is definitely much cheaper for PI: no initial registration fee
of ≥$500. The maintenance cost is $100/year
On Mar 28, 2014, at 5:58 AM, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hi Owen,
>
>> I, for one, would not want to start having to pay RIPE-level fees.
>>
>> ARIN fees are a much better deal than RIPE fees.
>
> Only up to Small... The RIPE NCC membership fee is €1750 (±$2400 currently)
> for everybody. The A
Hi Owen,
> I, for one, would not want to start having to pay RIPE-level fees.
>
> ARIN fees are a much better deal than RIPE fees.
Only up to Small... The RIPE NCC membership fee is €1750 (±$2400 currently) for
everybody. The ARIN fees are between $500 and $32000, with category Small at
$2000
> On 27.03.2014, at 22:27, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> ...and this is aside from daniel's global measurement empire. not sure it
> is a registry's job to do this, but it is a serious contribution to the
> internet. ...
there is the 'measurement analysis and tools' working group
http://www.ripe.
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 11:27:26 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> e.g. the database working group covers what you think of
> as whois and the routing registry. the wg developed the
> darned irr definition and continues to evolve it.
> consequence? the irr is actively used in two regions in
> the worl
I, for one, would not want to start having to pay RIPE-level fees.
ARIN fees are a much better deal than RIPE fees.
Owen
On Mar 27, 2014, at 3:10 PM, Cb B wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2014 3:03 PM, "John Curran" wrote:
>>
>> And I would welcome discussion of how ARIN (and nanog) can be more like
> RI
On Mar 28, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> ...
> i purposefully phrased it a bit differently, how can arin engage, get
> real participation from, and serve its community, the operators. i was
> stealing examples from ripe.
>
> but, for concrete action, how about a half day session at the n
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 02:04:30AM +, John Curran wrote:
> Internet routing registries are a fine example; one could argue that
> it should be integrated with the number resource registry, but we also
> have examples of independent routing registries in active use (and I
> can see some potent
On Mar 28, 2014, at 6:04 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> i will refrain from characterizing the ppml list. needless to say, i do
> not subscribe.
>
> my point is that what arin does should be of interest to nanog
> subscribers. in theory, the ops are the arin community, the registry
> serves operations
nanog is a separable game. it is currently very confused between form
and substance, making committees for everything. like the bcop thing.
two organizations, nanog and isoc, forming organizational structures to
create a document store. the ops' doc store is ripe's because the ripe
wgs produced
On Mar 27, 2014 3:03 PM, "John Curran" wrote:
>
> And I would welcome discussion of how ARIN (and nanog) can be more like
RIPE - that is very much up to this community and its participation far
more than ARIN..
>
> /John
>
How about we fold ARIN into RIPE? Why not? I agree with all of Randy's
poi
hi john,
>> i think your attemt to move the discussion to the arin ppml list
>> exemplifies one core of the problem.
> I offered ppml out of respect to the nanog subscribers, that is all...
i will refrain from characterizing the ppml list. needless to say, i do
not subscribe.
my point is that w
And I would welcome discussion of how ARIN (and nanog) can be more like RIPE -
that is very much up to this community and its participation far more than
ARIN..
/John
> On Mar 28, 2014, at 5:27 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> john,
>
> i think your attemt to move the discussion to the arin ppml li
> On Mar 28, 2014, at 5:27 AM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
>
> john,
>
> i think your attemt to move the discussion to the arin ppml list
> exemplifies one core of the problem.
Randy -
I offered ppml out of respect to the nanog subscribers, that is all...
/John
>
>
>
> and this is aside from d
john,
i think your attemt to move the discussion to the arin ppml list
exemplifies one core of the problem. this is not about address policy,
but arin thinks of itelf as a regulator not a registry.
contrast with the ripe community and the ncc, which is not nirvana but
is a hell of a lot better.
20 matches
Mail list logo
