[cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 20

Dear all,

I want to quickly revisit a comment made by Michele, who mentioned that
many other working groups have a more steady flow of emails (although we
seem to be doing a pretty good job of late) because they are working on
specific projects.

I had a look on the RIPE website and found the following description of the
workgroup:

The working group discusses the following:

   1. The working group will primarily discuss outreach from the traditional
   RIPE community to everyone else, especially governments, regulators and
   NGOs, all of whom we are trying to bring into our community. Topics are
   *not* to duplicate issues discussed in other working groups
   <https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg>. This working group should
   complement the other working groups and help participants engage in
   appropriate work.
   2. The RIPE NCC's current outreach activities will be reported, and the
   RIPE NCC will seek advice and guidance on future activities. This is to
   make the discussions more focused - currently the only forum for these
   discussions is the ripe-list
   <http://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list> mailing list.
   3. The working group will develop and clarify the RIPE community's
   position on issues that are of relevance to the public sector or on which a
   community position has been sought.
   4. The working group will be responsible for maintenance of the RIPE
   Document produced by the Enhanced Cooperation Task Force
   <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-464>, describing the RIPE
   community, existing policy development processes and outreach programs. The
   working group explicitly does not have change control over the RIPE
   Policy Development Process <https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies>
   (PDP) itself.

The working group is also an important channel through which the RIPE
community can communicate with others in the Information Society. The
Chairs are not to become special Ambassadors for RIPE. Their role is the
same as other RIPE Working Group chairs, which implies they of course could
be asked now and then what the status of the working group is. The process
by which RIPE and RIPE NCC respectively coordinate with other bodies (such
as the NRO <http://www.nro.net/>) and communicate (mostly via RIPE NCC or
the chair of RIPE) is not changed by creation and existence of this working
group.

I was wondering how we are working on issues 1,3, & 4? Perhaps people with
a longer history in the group could elaborate so we can discuss how to move
forward, and perhaps address some of the concerns raised by Michele?

best,



On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:00 AM, <cooperation-wg-request at ripe.net> wrote:

> Send cooperation-wg mailing list submissions to
>         cooperation-wg at ripe.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://mailman.ripe.net/
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         cooperation-wg-request at ripe.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         cooperation-wg-owner at ripe.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cooperation-wg digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: [BMI-SPAM-Verdacht] Re: cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53,
>       Issue 16 (Michael Oghia)
>    2. Re: cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16
>       (Patrik =?utf-8?b?RsOkbHRzdHLDtm0=?=)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 18:44:21 +0300
> From: Michael Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
> To: Constanze.Buerger at bmi.bund.de
> Cc: Cooperation WG <cooperation-wg at ripe.net>, Gordon Lennox
>         <gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cooperation-wg] [BMI-SPAM-Verdacht] Re: cooperation-wg
>         Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16
> Message-ID:
>         <CAMCMt7oat=fWQxn_kOub6cbdq1Mu_os172J3nWiHHb-d_=
> oVxA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Thank you for sharing this Constanze!
>
> Indeed, the more we work together, the more we will accomplish things. I am
> sure of that. Collaboration is how we built the Internet, and and I firmly
> believe collaboration and openness is how we will continue to ensure it
> evolves in a way that is advantageous and beneficial to humanity.
>
> -Michael
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:39 PM, <Constanze.Buerger at bmi.bund.de> wrote:
>
> > We should go on and make them aware from what we learned:
> >
> > For all politicians there is the aim to bring in content ? we have the
> > process. J
> >
> >
> >
> > For you interest our bp from the last 6 months:
> >
> > New  role of public administration and governments
> >
> >
> >
> > The world of Internet is growing. In this global Internet world  not only
> > ISPs are the legitimate users and stakeholders but also citizens at home
> > with upcoming smart home solutions, companies with industry 4.0
> solutions,
> > worldwide located enterprises or governments and public administrations.
> > The deployment of IPv6 is the  main issue to keep the internet running
> and
> > we have to ensure requirements of all new stakeholders into account.
> About
> > this communication way and the role of public administration in the
> > community I told you last year.
> >
> > But now we furthermore see a change in hierarchic organizations as well.
> >
> > The work of multistakeholder groups is  based on maillinglists. These are
> > driven by events , have topics for specialists and need fast decisions.
> In
> > hierarchical organizations we can join these lists on working level, but
> we
> > have to use the decissionmaking process to continue. And this is a
> problem
> > because this structure is to slow to  work with multistakeholder groups.
> >
> > So we need more longterm strategies on high levels and concrete concepts
> > and the mandate to bring in decissions on working levels .
> >
> > . To reflect more security, technical, organizational, economic, social
> > and political constraints and to ensure the internet rules, we have to
> > figure out a new ?Thinking? and new ?Cooperation Forms?.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Constanze
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Von:* cooperation-wg [mailto:cooperation-wg-bounces at ripe.net] *Im
> > Auftrag von *Michael Oghia
> > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2016 16:12
> > *An:* Gordon Lennox
> > *Cc:* Cooperation WG
> > *Betreff:* [BMI-SPAM-Verdacht] Re: [cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg
> > Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16
> >
> >
> >
> > I completely agree with you Gordon, good points.
> >
> >
> >
> > My strategy that I've really learned from others is to positively impact
> > decisions through relationship building. I find it an effective one, and
> > once a decision maker understands that the community's intentions are
> > positive (or at least non-threatening), then perhaps they are more keen
> to
> > listen. With that said, DiploFoundation, for instance, does a lot of work
> > with diplomats and a lot of training with government.
> >
> >
> >
> > In the end I think it's important to remember that, regardless of
> politics
> > and power, the people making decisions -- the politicians, bureaucrats,
> > etc. -- are still people. Just people.
> >
> >
> > -Michael
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Gordon Lennox <
> gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > One of the nice things about this community is that you ask a question
> and
> > you get a response.
> >
> > But when it comes to governments, both politicians and officials, it is
> > not always about a lack of understanding. It can be about a very strong
> > disagreement about values.
> >
> > I would add though that often it is not even just about ?governments?.
> > Even in a government from a particular culture and of a certain flavour
> > there can be very strong internal / inter-departmental disagreements. And
> > it is not always the ?good guys? who have clue.
> >
> > Gordon
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 23 Jun 2016, at 15:37, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The tricky ones are the ones where the views of the community
> > > and the views of (some) governments are in conflict, and
> > > activism, rather than education, is what is needed. In that
> > > case we need to be very clear about who represents whom.
> >
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> /ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20160623/3b40b1b7/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:41:32 +0200
> From: "Patrik =?utf-8?b?RsOkbHRzdHLDtm0=?=" <paf at frobbit.se>
> To: "Corinne Cath" <corinnecath at gmail.com>
> Cc: cooperation-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16
> Message-ID: <6774327E-646A-44D7-AB4B-8D8EDB97CA5B at frobbit.se>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On 23 Jun 2016, at 12:07, Corinne Cath wrote:
>
> > Where the report will be discussed with some of the original authors.
>
> A number of us wrote various pieces of the report, or the background
> reports that is the foundation of the main report. And you will see
> presentations on the various pieces here and there the next year I guess.
>
> No.33 on fragmentation due to interest of market economy forces <
> http://ourinternet.org/research/market-driven-challenges-open-internet-standards>
> I presented Tuesday this week in Slovenia at their Go6/SovenianNOG meeting,
> and you can find the video recording here:
>
> <https://video.arnes.si/portal/asset.zul?id=d1KGQcgHUhRaGXngplfQhYKn>
>
>    Patrik
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 203 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> URL: <
> /ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20160623/e2d9103b/attachment-0001.sig
> >
>
> End of cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 20
> **********************************************
>



-- 
Corinne J.N. Cath
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20160624/0c391bdf/attachment.html>