April 2026 - cooperation-wg - mailman.ripe.net

@EXT: Europol EC3 Cyber Innovation Forum 2026 - Call-for-Proposals
by Iovini, Emanuele 10 Apr '26

10 Apr '26

Dear Cooperation Working Group, I hope this e-mail finds you well. I'm Emanuele Iovini and I work at Europol the European Cybercrime Centre (EC3). I believe it could be valuable to share this message here. Among many initiatives in Europe, EC3 launched a Cyber Innovation Forum (CIF) that brings together law enforcement, policymakers, industry, and academia to explore cutting-edge approaches to cybercrime investigation and prevention. The forum aims to foster collaboration, share practical innovations, and shape the future response to cybercrime. The EC3 Policy and Development team just announced a Call-for-Proposals for the EC3 Cyber Innovation Forum 2026 (CIF2026). The aim of the Call-for-Proposals is to find original and impactful ideas that support law enforcement innovation in cybercrime investigation, prevention, and resilience. Are invited, including but not limited to: * Tools and technologies supporting cybercrime detection, investigation, attribution, and disruption; * Research papers and applied studies with operational, strategic, or policy relevance; * Investigative techniques and methodologies, including cross-border and multi-stakeholder approaches; * Legislation, regulatory frameworks, and legal analysis related to cybercrime and digital evidence; * Policies, strategies, and best practices for prevention, capacity building, and public-private cooperation; * Case studies and lessons learned from real-world operations or implementations. Submissions may be conceptual, technical, operational, legal, or policy-oriented, provided they offer clear value to the cybercrime ecosystem. Proposals can be submitted until Friday, 19 June 2026 at 23:59 (CET - Amsterdam time). The CIF2026 will take place the second week of October 2026 (date to be confirmed). More information can be found in the link below: https://www.europol.europa.eu/about-europol/european-cybercrime-centre-ec3/… I will also be in Edinburgh for RIPE92 from the 19th to the 21th of May if anyone wants to chat in person with me. Best regards, Emanuele _____________________________________________ Emanuele Iovini O3-21 Prevention and Outreach Team - E-Governance Specialist Europol - European CyberCrime Centre (EC3) Tel: 31 70 3531246 * M: +31 615398740 emanuele.iovini(a)europol.europa.eu<mailto:emanuele.iovini@europol.europa.eu> www.europol.europa.eu<http://www.europol.europa.eu/> _____________________________________________

1 0

ENUM (e164.arpa): background, scope, and coordination steps
by Hisham Ibrahim 08 Apr '26

08 Apr '26

Dear colleagues, This message summarises recent discussion regarding ENUM (e164.arpa) and clarifies the scope and next steps. The RIPE NCC has operated the e164.arpa registry for many years under instructions and coordination arrangements established with the ITU-T and IAB. These arrangements, and the operational context for how the registry is run, are described here: https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/dns/enum/iab-instructions/ Recently, a request was raised in the RIPE Database Working Group to support ENUM (e164.arpa) in RDAP for querying the RIPE Database. We noted that RDAP support for ENUM is not currently implemented, but could be added if there is clear interest. We also checked current query patterns and found a few hundred ENUM-related queries per day in DNS and in Database; so low usage, but not zero. Following discussion on the Database WG mailing list, including replies in support, we proposed implementing RDAP support for ENUM. While this is a limited operational change, it was recognised that anything touching E.164 and e164.arpa can raise political questions that go beyond the purely technical. As e164.arpa is directly linked to the ITU E.164 numbering system, the relevant points of contact are typically national administrations and the entities they designate. This led us to consult ITU-T Study Group 2 to clarify the status of ENUM and its usage and needs for ongoing support. ITU-T will ask member states for their feedback and share this with us. ITU-T provides an established and coordinated channel to reach those administrations, and importantly confirm whether any delegating authorities still rely on the service, so our technical decisions are informed by real-world use and help us avoid unnecessary operational risk, confusion, or compliance headaches (including in the context of regulatory frameworks such as NIS2). We are also reaching out to the IAB regarding these operations, which the RIPE NCC performs under its instruction on behalf of the global DNS and Internet community. I am sharing this message with the DNS, Database, Cooperation and RIPE NCC Services Working Group mailing lists to ensure all relevant working groups are informed. If you wish to share thoughts in response, please reply to the thread on the RIPE NCC Services WG mailing list. Best regards, Hisham Ibrahim Chief Community Officer, RIPE NCC

4 6

Re: Proposed Digital Networks Act (DNA) perspectives
by Christian de Larrinaga 03 Apr '26

03 Apr '26

Desiree Miloshevic <dmiloshevic(a)identity.digital> writes: > Hi Christian > > As you know the RIPE NCC is neutral, however community members can contribute their views to the ongoing consultation. > > This might be a good opportunity to reactivate the small task group via the cooperation working group and contribute to the consultation? > > Roman’s suggestion for the RIPE NCC to organise an Open house meeting in June is also > a good suggestion. > Berec seemed quite discombobulated. So yes keeping tabs on developments is good. > > Best > Desiree > — > > > >> On 2 Apr 2026, at 13:15, Christian de Larrinaga via cooperation-wg <cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net> wrote: >> >> Will RIPE be preparing a submission on the IP community's take on the >> Commission's policy approach? >> >> Given RIPE NCC covers a larger geographical and political and technical >> community than the EU Commission. >> >> ? >> >> >> Romain Bosc <rbosc(a)ripe.net> writes: >> >>> Dear colleagues >>> >>> BEREC published its preliminary assessment of the DNA proposal -- see here: >>> https://www.berec.europa.eu/en/news/press-releases/berec-provides-early-ass… >>> >>> >>> BEREC will work on a deeper assessment, which should be published around June. >>> >>> This could be a good timing to organise a second Open House on the topic. >>> >>> All best, Romain >>> >>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 at 07:39, Hisham Ibrahim <HMI(a)ripe.net> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Tahar et al., and thanks Desiree for bringing this to the list. >>> >>> While what I will say is well understood by many in the community, it's still helpful to keep in mind the dual role the >>> RIPE NCC plays, and the boundaries that are necessary for those roles to function effectively. >>> >>> The RIPE NCC has a responsibility to support and defend Internet technical coordination: to explain how the >>> Internet’s core works technically, why open standards and neutral coordination and registration of Internet >>> Number Resources matter, and why global interoperability is a prerequisite for innovation, competition, and >>> sustainable development. This includes engagement with IGOs, governments, and regulators across our service, as >>> well as institutions at EU and national level, and contributing technical expertise and operational reality to policy >>> discussions. >>> >>> For those who are interested, the positions and submissions the RIPE NCC has made to UN, EU, and broader >>> Internet governance processes are publicly available on the RIPE NCC website. >>> >>> https://www.ripe.net/community/internet-governance/multi-stakeholder-engage… >>> >>> >>> At the same time, the RIPE NCC also serves as the secretariat to the RIPE community. In that role, it does not act as >>> a political actor or lobby on behalf of the community. Instead, it enables bottom-up, community-led processes, >>> provides factual and technical input, and supports the outcomes that the community itself develops through its >>> Working Groups. >>> >>> On “Fair Share” specifically, we’ve seen a strong example of this community-led approach already: this Working >>> Group convened a small task team (through an open call) that produced a substantive response to the European >>> Commission’s consultation (May 2023). That piece of work came directly out of the WG, drawing on community >>> expertise, and the RIPE NCC supported the process in its secretariat role. >>> >>> https://www.ripe.net/media/documents/RIPE_Cooperation_Working_Group_Small_T… >>> >>> >>> This is why I agree with Julf's point: this Working Group is precisely the right place for the community to come >>> together, assess policy developments like “Fair Share”, and articulate shared concerns or principles grounded in >>> technical and operational realities. When the community develops a common position, the RIPE NCC can fully >>> support that work in its role as secretariat including by helping ensure those perspectives are understood in >>> relevant policy forums. >>> >>> The RIPE NCC can also offer the co-chairs the option to organize open houses or similar online sessions on these >>> topics as an extension to the discussion on the mailing list and at the RIPE meetings, should that be useful for >>> broadening participation and engagement across the community. >>> >>> https://www.ripe.net/meetings/open-house/ >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Hisham Ibrahim >>> >>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 at 12:47, Johan Helsingius via cooperation-wg <cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 23/01/2026 10:11 pm, Tahar Schaa wrote: >>>> I am firmly convinced that the RIPE NCC as an organization and the RIPE >>>> community must finally become significantly more politically active and >>>> engage in more lobbying, because the mechanisms are what they are. >>>> >>>> If you only concern yourself with IPv6 address allocation schemes, >>>> routing policies, and open-source repositories with cool code (which I >>>> much prefer), then you shouldn't be surprised when the EU Commission >>>> ignores you as an organization and regularly makes terrible decisions. >>>> >>>> Someone has to go to those canapé receptions... >>> >>> Seems RIPE NCC needs to get better at promoting their work on >>> interaction with the EU. They do go to some of those canapé >>> receptions, and even organize some of their own, such as the >>> annual Government Roundtable in Brussels, where the chairs >>> of this WG also try to attend. >>> >>> But yes, this is very much what this WG is all about. >>> >>> Julf >>> >>> ----- >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: >>> https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/cooperation-wg.ripe.net/ >>> As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your >>> subscription before you can change your settings. >>> More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ >>> >>> ----- >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: >>> https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/cooperation-wg.ripe.net/ >>> As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription >>> before you can change your settings. >>> More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ >>> >>> ----- >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription >>> options, please visit: >>> https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/cooperation-wg.ripe.net/ >>> As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account >>> with the email matching your subscription before you can change your >>> settings. >>> More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ >> >> -- >> Christian de Larrinaga >> ----- >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription >> options, please visit: >> https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/cooperation-wg.ripe.net/ >> As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account >> with the email matching your subscription before you can change your >> settings. >> More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ -- Christian de Larrinaga

1 0

Proposed Digital Networks Act (DNA) perspectives
by Desiree Miloshevic 02 Apr '26

02 Apr '26

Dear members and colleagues, I would like to share a couple of recent blog posts on the proposed Digital Networks Act (DNA) that you may find of interest: Internet Society: “Fair Share and the Digital Networks Act (DNA): Three Concerns” https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2026/01/fair-share-and-the-digital-net… <> Konstantinos Komaitis: “The Draft Digital Networks Act (DNA): A Critique” https://www.komaitis.org/write-share-ignite/the-draft-digital-networks-act-… <> Thoughts, reactions or additional perspectives are very welcome. best Desiree — RIPE Coop WG Co-Chair

6 5

Re: ENUM (e164.arpa): background, scope, and coordination steps
by Hisham Ibrahim 01 Apr '26

01 Apr '26

Thank you Richard, this is very helpful context. The pointers to the FCC, ATIS/SIP Forum and BT material are a valuable contribution to the broader community input we are gathering on the current role and relevance of e164.arpa. If there are other particular filings, standards documents or implementation examples that you think are relevant, I would be keen to receive them. Many thanks again for sharing this. Best regards, Hisham On Tue, 31 Mar 2026 at 23:35, Richard Shockey <richard(a)shockey.us> wrote: > > > Patrik .. thank you so much for cc me here. I’m very aware of that the > status is of TN to FQDN resolution is. This is under active discussion at > the FCC as it is planning on sunsetting the existing TDM / SS7 networks in > the United States. I literally had a call with US national carriers about > this today. The SIP Forum and ATIS are working this issue as a standards > profile issue. > > > > > https://access.atis.org/higherlogic/ws/groups/8ba10810-ca63-4d03-8155-018d2… > > > > The British have their own process. > > > > > https://business.bt.com/content/dam/bt-business/pdfs/insights/All-IP%20whit… > > > > There are endless Federal Communications Commission’s filings on this. You > can easily go the FCC website and through ECFS find the dockets. 25-304 > 25-208 17-97 its all public. > > > > Canada is right behind us. > > > > Once upon a time maybe decade ago RFC 6116 might have been useful, but the > carriers and their national regulators have chosen a different path. > Numbering is a very very special thing national regulators hold closely. I > imagine Sweden is no different. In the US this is governed by national law. > UK and European law are similar. > > > > https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/251 > > > > e164.arpa will IMHO have no real role it what the modern all SIP IP > network will look like. > > > > BTW the USG could care squat about ITU T thinks about anyting. > > > > Happy to take questions or provide other guidance… > > > > > > > > > > Richard Shockey > > Shockey Consulting LLC > > Chairman of the Board SIP Forum > > www.shockey.us > > www.sipforum.org > > richard<at>shockey.us > > Skype-Linkedin-Facebook –Twitter rshockey101 > > PSTN +1 703-593-2683 > > >

3 2