[ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting

> > OK, but what do you feel about the corollary: is a RIR free to choose
> > any LIR that seeks service, or is it constrained to serve only those
> > within a certain (or sometimes uncertain) geographical area?  Before
> > answering, remember what the E in RIPE, the A in ARIN and the AP
> > in APNIC stand for.
> > 
> > Regards.
> > 
> > Mike Norris
> 
> Thanks Mike,  it's a briliant remark!
> 
> Excerpt from RIPE-167:
> 
> 	If  has been suggested more than once that the coun-                
> 	tries of the CIS in fact form a separate region from                
> 	Europe that needed special regional support.

Argh! Now you start to understand what RIPE-167 is really all about.

> 
> Sounds with no pardon... A huge region is treated as Terra ******* (self
> censored) Incognita with savage population.

It does not matter that much. I mean, I do not take this as an offense.

> 
> FYI: CIS countries are Russia, Ukraine, Belorussia, Moldova, Armenia, 
> Georgia, Azerbaidjan, Kazakhstan, Kirgyzstan, Uzbekistan,Tadjikistan,
> Turkmenistan.
> 
> There is no denying the fact that part of them are in Europe or very
> close to it.

Addition: "and tend to aim at becoming part of Europian community"

> 
> IMHO the only difference between two EUROPEAN RIRs is working language
> (English for RIPE and Russian for RIPN). 

Which is not difference at all, granted that all CIS countries
as well as Baltic ones have their own respective languages.
Add the fact that technicians normally _do_ speak English well
enough to make "language matters" of small importance even for Russian LIRs.

The other difference pointed out at Moscow meeting was payment
in roubles which really does not make sense in other CIS or FSU countries.

> 
> If it will be decided that the best solution to serve Russian speaking
> community is to create  separate RIR (istead of employing some Russian
> speaking hostmasters at RIPE NCC, creating separate list like
> hostmaster-ru at ripe.net and so on),  it seems essential that European LIRs
> might choose among the 2 European RIRs, but not vice versa, 
> when some _authority_ will decide, that starting from day V. all LIRs 
> in country CC will be served by appropriate RIR. 

And the results may well turn to be disastrous. During the Moscow meeting
some things were made quite obvious
1. There will be no eternal alternative. There will be finite test
   period after which all LIRs should be served by only one RIR.
2. After the test period the decision should be made by some kind of voting.
   At first it seems that the voting rules (as outlined in Moscow
   meeting's statement) are really democratic. The decision should be
   made "based on agreement of not less then 2/3 of registered LIRs,
   functioning on the territory of each of the countries served" 
   (translation is mine, I can send you the text in Russian if you like).
   Now, the question is: does this mean 2/3 of _all_ the LIRs
   in _all_ countries served? Simple arithmetic will show you that
   if this was the intended meaning, Russian LIRs will _always_
   outvote any other. BTW, this could be the case with all the other
   votings, decisions and the like.
3. The fact that representatives of some countries were absent
   during the Moscow meeting will be taken as the indication
   that LIRs in these countries "do not care" rather then "do not agree".
   Mr.Stesin had already pointed this out. Let me show you an example:
   at Moscow meeting there were 4 LIRs from Ukraine. _All_ of them
   voted against the statement. The result was: the statement had been
   adopted nevertheless.
...
I've sent all my remarks w.r.t. Moscow meeting to Mr.Karrenberg and will
resend them to the list if there will be some interest

> 
> I hope that authors of the document are on the list and kindly
> invite them clearify the essence.

Sorry, but are you that naive? I've told all this during the Moscow meeting.
Can you guess the answers?

> Othervise we'll continue discussion about nothing.

Sorry, no. The more LIRs will ask questions about RIPE-167, the more
obvious it will become what it is really aimed at. The more obvious
it will become that the idea of CIS-RIR or FSU-RIR or whatever it will
be called, does not meet that much appreciation in CIS/FSU/...
The more difficult it will be for Mr.Platonov to advocate CIS-RIR
in it's current (proposed) form. Cf. 3 above.

> 
> With best regards,
> 
> Rimas Janusauskas
> 
> 
> 
> 

Yours,

-- 
Igor Romanenko                                                   @..@
Office: igor at lucky.net, +380-(44)-290-03-48                     (----)
Home:   igor at frog.kiev.ua                                      ( |  | )
http://www.lucky.net/~igor/                                      "  "
                                  "On the Internet nobody knows you are a Frog"