[ncc-services-wg] Questions about the fax the RIPE NCC received from United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI).

Hi Nick, all -

On 19.09.2012 11:42, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 18/09/2012 22:40, Erik Bais wrote:
>> So, all jokes aside, what is the reply that is provided to the writer and
>> if he would show up at the RIPE meeting, will he be provided any room to
>> discuss the topic and will the request for a resolution be discussed during
>> the GM meeting?
>
> The only relevant issue here is whether the RIPE NCC is in compliance with
> Dutch / EU law regarding the sanctions.  No doubt the NCC's lawyers and the
> Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs will be able to provide a conclusive
> answer, and that we will be informed shortly.
>
> Regarding a presence at either the RIPE meeting or the GM, I see no
> particular reason to treat UANI differently to anyone else.  I.e. as Jim
> noted, they are welcome to register, pay for and attend the RIPE meeting
> and even request observer status at the GM on the discretion of the board.
>   But I'm not sure on what basis they are demanding that the GM hold an
> emergency debate on something which is a matter of legal procedure, when it
> is currently unclear what the RIPE NCC's legal obligations are on the matter.

once more: I fully agree with this approach. Pressing people to do 
something always needs two parties: those that press and those that 
allow to be pressed. The RIPE NCC and its mmbers being the latter should 
stay firm here.

Besides this, I find it remarkable that despite all these efforts and 
background research they seem to have put in this, they obviously still 
are under the assumption that the RIPE NCC has anything to do with - or 
at least influence on - TLDs in general, ccTLDs in particular and/or 
specifically the .ir ccTLD.

Best,

	Carsten