The cost of running RIPE NCC has become a recurring controversy, and for good reason. To assess it properly, we must start from first principles: what a Regional Internet Registry actually does, and what it is supposed to do.

RIPE NCC’s core mandate is narrow. It operates a registration database for IP addresses and AS numbers, and it runs RPKI to authenticate routing information. Technically, this is not complex. The registration database itself is only a few hundred megabytes in size, and RPKI is a well-defined operational service. Everything else—training programs, large conferences, measurement platforms, extensive travel, and community engagement infrastructure—is supplementary, not foundational.

Yet RIPE NCC’s projected 2024 budget is €38.2 million. Of that, roughly €9.6 million is allocated to core registry services, and around another €10 million covers basic operational support such as HR, legal, and facilities. Even without any aggressive efficiency measures, RIPE NCC could operate its essential functions for roughly half its current budget. In other words, membership fees could be reduced by at least 50% simply by focusing on what the registry is actually meant to provide.

The remaining €20 million funds “value-added” services: information platforms, meetings, training, outreach, and travel. Some of these services are useful; some are excellent. But usefulness does not justify bundling them into a compulsory fee. RIR membership fees function as a de-facto tax on Internet access, paid indirectly by every end user. When a fee is compulsory, fairness demands that it be minimized and limited strictly to essential functions.

This matters because RIPE’s service region is not uniformly wealthy. It includes countries still in conflict, economies in transition, and communities where a few hundred euros represents a significant burden. Charging operators in those regions to subsidize global travel, conferences, and services they may never use is neither equitable nor defensible.

The solution is straightforward. Core registry services—registration and RPKI—should be funded by the mandatory membership fee, and nothing else. All other activities should be separated and funded through voluntary mechanisms: sponsorships, donations, usage-based fees, or independent foundations. This is how non-profits operate responsibly in every other sector. If services like RIPE Atlas, RIPEstat, training, or meetings provide real value, there will be no shortage of large operators and sponsors willing to support them directly.

The same logic applies to travel and events. Community meetings are valuable, but they do not need to be financed by a blanket levy on all members. Large telecoms and participants who attend can easily fund them through sponsorship or attendance fees. Essential infrastructure should not depend on expanding bureaucracy.

The debate should not be about how to rebalance fees or who pays more. It should be about scope discipline. Cut everything that is not essential, reduce fees to the lowest possible level, and let optional services stand on their own merits. That single decision would immediately restore fairness, reduce barriers to participation, and force RIPE NCC to align its structure with its mandate.

That is the change members should demand.