RIPE hostmasters visiting LIRs

Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote:

> Hi stephen,
>
> I am sorry you see it that way.
>
> *** We are not dictating anything here ***

Yes you are we had concensus that the original proposal was good but you the NCC
has turned its nose up at RIPE's request and come up with another alternative
which did not have concensus.

To summerise:

Propsal made
Discussion ensued
General agreement made but needing further work
NCC rejected ideas
NCC requested a formal proposal from Sam
Proposal made
Little discussion again general consensus made
Many requests for a response from NCC
NCC reject propsal and come up with alternative not discussed
Current discussion.

So the NCC is not working for RIPE we are now subject to the NCC concensus before
action is made not what your website states:
"The RIPE NCC performs activities primarily for the benefit of the membership in
Europe and the surrounding
 areas; mainly activities that its members need to organise as a group, even
though they may compete in other
 areas."

and the RIPE NCC Charter:

The RIPE Network Coordination Centre (NCC) provides services to european internet
service providers. It
 supports all the RIPE activities which cannot be effectively performed by
individual volunteers. The activities
 include:

The NCC is there for our benifit not the other way round.

>
>
> We need someone with the profile I described earlier to keep up to date
> with developments that affect hostmaster work and that is able to
> communicate that information to the hostmasters for use in their daily
> work dealing woth ISPs. This is a hard requirement for us to be able to
> provide a good service to all of you.

What are the hostmasters doing answering our requests if they are not already up
to date, this is a seperate issue and is clouding the original suggestion.



>
>
> Yes, we could have everyone reading all the trade journals, however doing
> that through proper training is more effective and saves your money.

No it does not, as hostmasters you should be keeping abreast of all the
developments, i would like to see more spent on getting the unacceptable wait que
brought down and employing of real technical staff if you are saying that the
staff is not technical.


>
>
> What my mail was proposing was to also use this person to get closer
> contact with ISPs, while not having the hostmasters themselves having to
> travel to the ISPs.

We do not want a person getting closer to ISP's we want the hostmaster team to
gain some expirience in the real world.



>
>
> I understood that the idea was to get the knowledge about your daily life
> to the hostmasters. If this person is able to communicate that, then what
> is the difference between having the hostmasters going there in person or
> someone communicating things to them?

You can not communicate experience unless this person is a member of the vulcan
race and is capable of mind melding, its not info we want communicating .




> From my perspective the main one is
> the disruption for daily work at the NCC that sending people out every so
> often can have which affects the time you have to wait to get a reply back
> from us.

It is already disrupted when the RIPE meetings happen and we put up with it. If it
is for the good of all and is communicated properly then i am sure RIPE will
tolerate it as was already agreed at the RIPE meeting.



>
>
> Quoting my previous mail: "I hope to hear from you" and I still do.
>
> Joao
>
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2000, Stephen Burley wrote:
>
> > Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I believe this thread never really came to an end.
> > >
> > > We have been thinking long about how to address the distance that is
> > > perceived
> > > as separating the RIPE NCC registration services from everyday
> > > operations of ISPs.
> > >
> > > We have considered the proposed idea of having RIPE NCC hostmasters
> > > visiting ISPs to get in touch with their daily operations and needs.
> > >
> > > The preceding mails have raised the issues of how to select the LIRs to be
> > > visited, the finance implications of having the hostmasters travel to
> > > these ISP locations, the potential danger of lobbying and whether those
> > > visits should be used as a mechanism for helping ISPs in auditing
> > > processes.
> > >
> > > To these, I would like to add the potential disruptions to
> > > operations that these visits may have for the Registration Services
> > > department.
> > >
> > > Now, financial issues could definitely be resolved in agreement with the
> > > membership.
> > >
> > > The potential for lobbying is a worrisome prospect, not because I fear
> > > that
> > > anyone would actually even think about it, but because should any
> > > allegations be raised it would be difficult to prove them wrong and in any
> > > case a certain damage would have been done.
> > >
> > > Mainly because of this, I would rather not have RIPE NCC hostmasters visit
> > > individual members.
> > >
> > > However, we do acknowledge the need for hostmasters to be more up to date
> > > with
> > > developments in the industry and the fact that it would be very benefitial
> > > to increase awareness of daily ISP operations within Registration
> > > Services.
> > >
> > > To address this, and some other internal issues, we will be hiring for a
> > > new position within the RIPE NCC
> > > with the specific function of providing internal technical advise and
> > > training that will enable us to better track developments and be more
> > > familiar with everyday operations.
> >
> > So although this looks like a change in thought its not really, as this means
> > one person in the NCC will be more clued up as to practices and needs within
> > the ISP world and even have a vast experience of many environments, but they
> > will not be doing and hostmaster work which was the whole point of this
> > proposal. This proposal was designed to give the experience and feel of
> > working in a very competitive world and dealing with customers preconceptions
> > of what the internet is. This proposal goes no further than wasting our money
> > on a new position within the NCC with no more real gains other than technical
> > knowledge increase which can be done by reading the ISP/telco trade journals.
> > What is the difference from a hostmaster being accused of coercion or this
> > new persons position still the same perceived problem.
> >
> > The RIPE NCC is their to because the RIPE community wishes it and the RIPE
> > NCC up hold policy as set out by RIPE and as far as i see it there was a
> > consensus that this initial proposal was a good idea, but the NCC thought
> > otherwise who is dictating policy here?
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > This person, will not be routinely involved in the handling of member
> > > address requests and might be a good candidate to visit a few LIRs
> > > selected
> > > randomly from different "pools" (big, small, different economic
> > > and regulatory environments,...) in the future.
> > >
> > > I believe this solution can effectively address the concerns raised by
> > > this
> > > discussion while minimizing the drawbacks of the solutions proposed so far
> > > and also has other benefits for the RIPE NCC.
> > >
> > > Hope to hear from you,
> > > Joao Damas
> > > Head of external services
> > > RIPE NCC
> >
> >