RIPE NCC Issues

Please see inline for comments.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: michael.dillon at gtsip.net [mailto:michael.dillon at gtsip.net]
> Sent: 17 April 2000 13:12
> To: lir-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: RIPE NCC Issues
> 
> 
> On Mon, 17 April 2000, Gareth Staff wrote:
> 
> > Furthermore, RIPE is made up of numerous business interests and that
> > the RIPE NCC is, in effect, employed by these businesses 
> for the express
> > purpose of handling their IP address requests.
> 
> This is an understandable misunderstanding but nevertheless, 
> a misunderstanding. First you should remember that a 
> not-for-profit organization like RIPE is typically not 
> employed by anyone but is operated by a group of members for 
> the benefit of the group as a whole and often for the benefit 
> of the general public as well. Secondly, you may wish to note 
> that RIPE serves not only businesses but also academic 
> institutions, governmental organizations and, often 
> indirectly, the general public in Europe, the Middle East and 
> Northern Africa.

Thankyou for this clarification. Perhaps it was my inadequate phraseology
that led to this comment. I agree that I missed out the non-business
oriented members, and will bear this in mind. The comment I made
was intended to mean that it was the 'members' who 'employ' the RIPE NCC
by way of membership fees.

> > Since there are many issues that have been raised (and I have yet to
> > see a constructive response from the RIPE NCC management) I feel
> > it necessary to ask the question..
> > 
> > Who does the RIPE NCC management answer to ?
> 
> First of all, they certainly do not answer to the members of 
> this mailing list. The list is available for interested 
> parties to discuss a specific set of issues, namely those 
> related to LIRs, but that doesn't mean the NCC management 
> reports to this list.

If the people on this list are paid up members of RIPE, then you are
implying that RIPE does not answer to it's members. If the recipients
of this list are not necessarily members of RIPE, then perhaps you
could point me in the direction of the 'members' mailing list.

> You need to be aware that there is a somewhat complex 
> structure that has been built up over the years. On the one 
> hand, RIPE is a type of membership organization that answers 
> to its members and has built a tradition of focussing its 
> activities in areas that its members are willing to support. 
> This can be tricky at times because many of the members are 
> businesses that compete directly in one or more Internet 
> related industries.

If RIPE has to answer to it's members, then this is the kind of
verification that I wanted, but I would like to hear it from the
RIPE NCC management.

> On the other hand, RIPE NCC is part of a global structure 
> that manages those aspects of the Internet which need to be 
> jointly managed. There is a central focus for this management 
> structure in ICANN http://www.icann.org which has taken over 
> the management and policy activities that were formerly 
> handled by IANA http://www.iana.org and the IETF 
> http://www.ietf.org. The RIPE NCC is one of three global 
> organizations (soon to be 5) that handle the day to day 
> activities of IP address registration in their region. The 
> others are ARIN http://www.arin.net in the Americas and 
> Sothern Africa, and APNIC http://www.apnic.net in the 
> Asia-Pacific region. These three organizations could be said 
> to also answer to ICANN and the ASO council of ICANN because 
> they must administer policies which are agreeable to all 
> parts of this planet.
> 
> If this sounds a lot like a complex political beast, then you 
> are beginning to understand. 

I am aware of the various political affiliations that encompass the
world, I was attepting the simplify the picture and focus on what I
perceive to be the core of the problem.

> > I would like to see the RIPE NCC being more open to these 
> discussions, and
> > honest about
> > any problems that they are having. I really do not think it 
> is acceptable to
> > act as though we,
> > as members of the RIPE community, do not have a right to 
> know what is going
> > on within
> > the organisation and to promote a closed door policy as far 
> as information
> > is concerned.
> 
> And now you should understand why you see the typical 
> symptoms of a bureaucracy within RIPE. This is neither bad 
> nor good; just one of those things that are inevitable in 
> organizations that must serve many masters.

What I'm talking about is not bureaucracy related symptoms, but rather
deliberate actions on the part of the management that under no circumstances
can be condoned by any member of this community. I realise that I'm taking
a lot upon myself for presuming to speak for all, but I am very confident
that when everything comes out in the wash, as it surely must, RIPE members
are going to be asking some very pointed questions of the way in which
the RIPE NCC management has acted.

> > After all, who pays the bills ?
> 
> See the part about many masters...

RIPE members then.

> > Accountability for the services offered must be clarified 
> if positive action
> > is to be taken, I would
> > not like to see these issues ignored and swept under the 
> carpet, otherwise
> > we face the prospect
> > of having an organisation that we pay for, doesn't work for us, and
> > implements internal policies
> > that alienates its' staff to the point where they feel that 
> their only
> > option is to leave.
> 
> I have yet to see evidence that the issues are being ignored. 
> So far, I see the RIPE NCC attempting to deal with some 
> issues, discussing those issues openly, and finding that 
> there is some disagreement as to whether their plan of action 
> is the right one.

Time will tell. I am not being unduly pessimistic here, I am
trying to highlight issues with a view to getting them fixed,
not form a lynch mob.


> > This is something that all members of the community must 
> take seriously and
> 
> I also do not see any evidence that people in the community 
> are not taking the issue seriously. They, like all of us, 
> have to balance many issues in their workaday lives and can 
> only give top priority to a small number of them. Since we 
> don't know all the issues vying for their attention, I think 
> it would be hasty for us to judge them with such little information.

I don't believe I said that the community was not taking this issue
seriously, merely affirmed the need. As for having 'such little
information',
this is part of what I am trying to address.

> ---
> Michael Dillon   Phone: +44 (20) 7769 8489   
>                  Mobile: +44 (79) 7099 2658
> Director of Product Engineering, GTS IP Services
> 151 Shaftesbury Ave.
> London WC2H 8AL
> UK
> 

I would just like to add that we fully support the principles upon which
RIPE functions. It is not my intention to simply supply a list of problems,
rather to open the discussion to facilitate the remedy, whatever form that
may take.

Regards,

Gareth Staff
Program Manager, EMEA Operations
UUNET (An MCI WorldCom company)
gareths at uk.uu.net/gstaff at uu.net