[ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Stesin <stesin at gu.net> writes:
A> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 15:30:14 +0200 (EET)
A> To: "Sergey A. Mukhin" <violet at rosnet.net>
A> cc: lir-wg at ripe.net, ncc at ripe.net

A> On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, Sergey A. Mukhin wrote:

>> On the other hand there is a tendency to a fast growing number
>> of LIRs in the fSU countries and it might make sense for RIPE
>> itself to establish its office or RIR for those who agree
A>                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A> 	"Office" -- no problem, but not "RIR"!  How can RIPE
A> 	establish a RIR without an agreement in the community
A> 	of the region served?  RIR creation should be
A> 	initiated by the representative community, not RIPE,
A> 	or am I missing something?

Quite right. The community does exist and let it decide.
Anyway the necessity of either RIR or RIPE office seems
to me reasonable.

>> to be served there to get load off the main office. ( Not a
>> business of mine, I agree. ) Consider the size of fSU region.

A> 	fSU is not a region.  Please use non-political
A> 	but geographical terms for defining region borders.

I always thought the term "geographical region" makes sense.
To pity I am not so good in geography to define something
for sure in geographical terms. Let us speak about East
Europe and, ugm, some of Asia region. More precisely,
about LIRs in that region which found reasonable to
unite and get a RIR or RIPE office. Would that do?
I would add: regions from fSU countries and to put it
frankly do not see why you do not like such a definition.

A> Who else rises the hand?  Mr. Alexey Platonov (Moscow,
A> RosNIIROS), and Mr. Anatoly Kramer (Moscow, ??? -- who
A> doesn't even aware of what e-mail is, AFAIK) -- two men,
A> two Russian semi-governmental organisations, each wants
A> to establish a "big registry" in Moscow, and to extend the scope
A> of this RIR to adjucent countries, taking away any choice
A> of where to be served from those countries.
>> 
>> Well, and who was 'contra' except Ukraine?

A> 	Ok, but who was present but Russia and Ukraine?
A> 	Russia was "pro", Ukraine was "contra".
A> 	1:1

It was not necessary to present there physically. The voting system
was not Soviet-like. Everybody concerned was noticed and if they
sent no votes "contra", they are "pro". I have no precise data --
let us ask people who keep those things running. Besides, if
I get things right LIRs were counted, not countries.


>> awaiting for votes "contra". There were no more "contra" yet.

A> 	ripe-167 is way too unclear for everyone to get its
A> 	main ideas in a moment.

Well, it was available for far more time than a moment.

>> >> Any people decide most ( or all ) of their own problems theirselves.
>> 
A> This statement of yours contradicts directly with the
A> approach of ripe-167 document.
>> 
>> I am afraid you mistreat the approach.

A> 	I'm afraid that ripe-167 is just very unclear and uncertain
A> 	at this point.

Maybe. For that case there are its authors able to clarify details.

>> >> But sometimes it is better to unite to get the solutions easier.
>> 
A> Would you mind explaining the benefits of uniting with you, please.
A> (Let's note that this last statement of yours has nothing close
A> to ripe-167's content at all).  No offense: friendship and
A> union are different things, aren't they?
>> 
>> I meant benefits of uniting .(point)

A> 	There are some benefits and some losses...

Sure. As in any business though. Some people call that "choice".

>> If you suppose uniting of
>> everybody but us, that sounds a bit odd, does not it?

A> 	I don't like the idea of *any* union with *anyone* until
A> 	it will be though out carefully in all the details
A> 	and everything will be obvious, certain and clear.

I think exactly so. :-) Very reasonable.

A> Pretty simple: some people here in Ukraine (me among them)
A> have a strong feeling that some Moscow guys want to "unite"
A> us with them without taking our opinion into attentions.
>> 
>> I am afraid I would never understand such a point of view. We declare
>> free choice for all.

A> 	Would you mind pointing me at the written document where
A> 	one can get a clear and certain statement of this?

Alas, I can not. Hope somebody else can.clarify that matter.

>> I meant just the following effect of the Soviet Union: 6 years are
>> not enough for a new generation who knows English rather than
>> Russia; not enough to get old communications completely changed.

A> 	Please leave alone this old crap about English/Russian
A> 	language.  If you are a LIR (and RIR serves LIRs) you
A> 	ought to know English, point.  If you don't know
A> 	English, you are the customer of a LIR where staff
A> 	is more knowlegeable.

A> 	Agreed?

No. Ideally everybody which has an Internet connectivity should know
English. You ( or I ) may say, `ought' as many times as we'd like -- and
nothing will change.

>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Sergey A. Mukhin			|    violet at rosnet.net
>> Network Administrator		|    http://violet.rosnet.net/
>> Russian Telecommunications Network	|    Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15
>> Moscow, Russia			|	  + 7 095 755 85 88
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *     If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly.     *
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 

A> Best regards,
A> Andrew Stesin

A> nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE




-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sergey A. Mukhin			|    violet at rosnet.net
    Network Administrator		|    http://violet.rosnet.net/
    Russian Telecommunications Network	|    Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15
    Moscow, Russia			|	  + 7 095 755 85 88
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*     If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly.     *
------------------------------------------------------------------------