- cooperation-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Internet Enforcement Continued Coordination and Delivery
by sandro.parranca＠anacom.pt 17 Apr '13

17 Apr '13

Dear GEntleman, I am currently a delegate on the IECCD group for incident responses, investigation capabilities and stratagies for e-commerce fraudulent practicies. I find that one of the major dificulties are related with the tracking and finding the responsables for the fraudulent website. Specialy in a global domain. Shouln't this ipe's wg be participating in this process? On line investigations should be supported by the CSIRT's. Best rgs, SP Pense no ambiente. Imprima o conteúdo desta mensagem apenas se for absolutamente necessário. Este email e ficheiros em anexo sao confidenciais e destinados somente ao conhecimento e utilizacao da(s) pessoa(s) ou entidade(s) a quem foram enderecados. Se recebeu este email ou anexos por erro, ou a eles teve acesso nao sendo o destinatario, por favor elimine-os contactando o remetente. Please consider the environment before printing this mail note. This email and files transmitted with it are confidential and intended for the sole use of the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it without using, copying, storing, forwarding or disclosing its contents to any other party. ICP-ANACOM - Autoridade Nacional de Comunicacoes http://www.anacom.pt

2 5

Re: [cooperation-wg] Internet Enforcement Continued Coordination and Delivery
by Michele Neylon :: Blacknight 16 Apr '13

16 Apr '13

Sandro What would RIPE be doing exactly? Regards Michele On 16 Apr 2013, at 12:14, <sandro.parranca(a)anacom.pt> wrote: > Dear GEntleman, > > I am currently a delegate on the IECCD group for incident responses, investigation capabilities and stratagies for e-commerce fraudulent practicies. > > I find that one of the major dificulties are related with the tracking and finding the responsables for the fraudulent website. Specialy in a global domain. > > Shouln't this ipe's wg be participating in this process? > > On line investigations should be supported by the CSIRT's. > > Best rgs, > SP > > > > Pense no ambiente. Imprima o conteúdo desta mensagem apenas se for absolutamente necessário. > > Este email e ficheiros em anexo sao confidenciais e destinados somente ao conhecimento e utilizacao da(s) pessoa(s) ou entidade(s) a quem foram enderecados. Se recebeu este email ou anexos por erro, ou a eles teve acesso nao sendo o destinatario, por favor elimine-os contactando o remetente. > > Please consider the environment before printing this mail note. > > This email and files transmitted with it are confidential and intended for the sole use of the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it without using, copying, storing, forwarding or disclosing its contents to any other party. > > ICP-ANACOM - Autoridade Nacional de Comunicacoes http://www.anacom.pt > Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions ♞ Hosting & Domains ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.co http://blog.blacknight.com/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

1 0

RIPE NCC Hosts Brussels Roundtable Meeting for Governments and Regulators
by Chris Buckridge 26 Mar '13

26 Mar '13

[Apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, Last Tuesday, 19 March 2013, the RIPE NCC hosted a Roundtable Meeting for Governments and Regulators at the Hotel Le Plaza in Brussels. The meeting attracted around 40 representatives of government, regulators and industry to discuss issues including RIPE IPv4 transfer policies and the ongoing Internet governance discussions in the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). A report of the meeting is available at: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/about-ripe-ncc-and-ripe/rip… If you have any questions or comments, we are happy to discuss them on the RIPE Cooperation Working Group mailing list, or you can send an email to <roundtable(a)ripe.net>. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

RIPE NCC to Host Arab IGF MAG Meeting and Open Consultation
by Chris Buckridge 21 Feb '13

21 Feb '13

Dear colleagues, We have posted a news item on www.ripe.net regarding the upcoming Arab IGF Open Consultation and Arab Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (AMAG) meeting, which will be hosted by the RIPE NCC and the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of the UAE. The two events will run from 3-5 March at the Radisson Royal Hotel in Dubai, UAE, with the AMAG meeting in closed sessions on 3 and 5 March and the Open Consultation on 4-5 March. Anyone with an interest is welcome to attend the Open Consultation, and remote participation facilities will also be available. The programme will also include a public session on “Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance in the Arab World”, with speakers including ICANN President and CEO, Fadi Chehade, and Chairman of the ICANN Board, Steve Crocker. The RIPE NCC is honoured to be working with the UAE TRA and the Arab IGF Secretariat to facilitate the community-driven development of the 2013 Arab IGF agenda. Full details are online at: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/industry-developments/ripe-… Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

Internet Governance and the RIPE NCC: The Year Ahead
by Chris Buckridge 20 Feb '13

20 Feb '13

Dear colleagues, We have just published an article on RIPE Labs that details some of the major Internet governance-related discussions currently taking place, as well as the RIPE NCC's priorities and activities in this area for the coming year. We encourage you to read the article and comment, either on RIPE Labs or on this mailing list. Feedback from the RIPE NCC membership and RIPE community is vital in shaping the RIPE NCC's position and strategy in relation to these issues. We also welcome any suggestions on how to improve the RIPE NCC's engagement with the public sector and other Internet stakeholders in your country or region. You can read the article in full at: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/chrisb/internet-governance-and-the-ripe-ncc-t… Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

New EU Cybersecurity Plan
by Gordon Lennox 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

"EU Cybersecurity plan to protect open internet and online freedom and opportunity - Cyber Security strategy and Proposal for a Directive" http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/eu-cybersecurity-plan-protect-op…

1 0

Fwd: ITU-T SG 2 meetings - summary
by Patrik Fältström 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

Forwarded with permission from Veni Markovski. Veni wrote among other things: > It is worth to notice how the ITU plays the game of occupying more and more space from the I* organizations - starting with ad hoc groups, study groups, dedicated groups, ITRs, and - late next year - with the change in their mandate. > > I am afraid that there is no (easy) way out of this labyrinth. > > The IPv4 legacy was discussed also at the last Council Working Group on Internet, and is now open for public comments, see here: <http://www.itu.int/en/council/Pages/consultation.aspx>, namely: > > > • Issue 2: Consultation on international public policy issues concerning IPv4 addresses. > > The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on international public policy issues related to (a) unused legacy IPv4 addresses, and (b) inter-region transfers of IPv4 addresses. Patrik Fältström

1 0

Re: [cooperation-wg] ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues
by Michele Neylon :: Blacknight 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

And more importantly, what should we be doing? -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 ________________________________________ From: cooperation-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net [cooperation-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net] on behalf of Carsten Schiefner [ripe-wgs.cs(a)schiefner.de] Sent: 12 February 2013 23:01 To: Patrik Fältström Cc: cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [cooperation-wg] ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues Thanks, Patrik for the FYI. And thanks to Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States of America, Finland, Canada, and Mexico for the well-worded statement. However, as I have failed to find a sufficient definition on ITU's website: what is the ITU Council again, what is its role and function? Thanks and best, Carsten On 12.02.2013 23:02, Patrik Fältström wrote: > ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public > Policy Issues have an "Open consultation" > > · Issue 1: Consultation on effectively countering and combatting > spam. > > The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public > Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on > international public policy issues related to effectively countering > and combatting spam. > > · Issue 2: Consultation on international public policy issues > concerning IPv4 addresses. > > The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public > Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on > international public policy issues related to (a) unused legacy IPv4 > addresses, and (b) inter-region transfers of IPv4 addresses. > > · Issue 3: Consultation on developmental aspects of the Internet. > > The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public > Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on > international public policy issues related to developmental aspects > of the Internet. > > http://www.itu.int/en/council/Pages/consultation.aspx > > Sweden did give together with a few other participants at the meeting > with the CWG the following statement that was added to the minutes of > the meeting: > >> Statement from Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Sweden, >> United Kingdom, United States of America, Finland, Canada, Mexico >> >> The above mentioned member states are of the view that, before ITU >> conducts public consultation on IPv4 addresses, there is a need to >> take into account the responsibilities of, and work already carried >> out, in other organizations. >> >> The member states note the extensive work on policy development and >> procedures already carried out in existing multi-stakeholder >> forums, including the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). As >> proposed in the meeting, the RIRs should have been invited to >> provide information to the CWG before conducting public >> consultation in order to avoid duplication of work. >> >> The member states are further of the view that all stakeholders, >> including the ITU members, should be encouraged to participate in >> existing multi-stakeholder fora. > > Patrik Fältström

2 1

ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues
by Patrik Fältström 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues have an "Open consultation" · Issue 1: Consultation on effectively countering and combatting spam. The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on international public policy issues related to effectively countering and combatting spam. · Issue 2: Consultation on international public policy issues concerning IPv4 addresses. The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on international public policy issues related to (a) unused legacy IPv4 addresses, and (b) inter-region transfers of IPv4 addresses. · Issue 3: Consultation on developmental aspects of the Internet. The Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Public Policy Issues invites all stakeholders to provide input on international public policy issues related to developmental aspects of the Internet. http://www.itu.int/en/council/Pages/consultation.aspx Sweden did give together with a few other participants at the meeting with the CWG the following statement that was added to the minutes of the meeting: > Statement from Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States of America, Finland, Canada, Mexico > > The above mentioned member states are of the view that, before ITU conducts public consultation on IPv4 addresses, there is a need to take into account the responsibilities of, and work already carried out, in other organizations. > > The member states note the extensive work on policy development and procedures already carried out in existing multi-stakeholder forums, including the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). As proposed in the meeting, the RIRs should have been invited to provide information to the CWG before conducting public consultation in order to avoid duplication of work. > > The member states are further of the view that all stakeholders, including the ITU members, should be encouraged to participate in existing multi-stakeholder fora. Patrik Fältström

2 2

Re: [cooperation-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE response to Terrorist use of the Internet -CleanIT
by Dr Michiel de Weger 01 Feb '13

01 Feb '13

1 0

RIPE response to Terrorist use of the Internet - CleanIT
by Nash, Steve 01 Feb '13

01 Feb '13

CleanIT (www.cleanitproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Reducing-terrorist-use-of-… ) seems to me to be a useful report asking governments to facilitate awareness and fund "referral units", and "Internet Companies" to provide reasonable end-user feedback mechanisms on suspected Terrorist Internet use. - Terrorist use of the Internet is not a subject that fits into the remit of any one RIPE WG. - One might consider such use to be Abuse, but the current charter of Anti Abuse excludes dealing with illegal content. - This subject may also be considered to require specialist attention that not all members of any existing WG would wish to follow. Do we need a new WG, or do we need a sub-WG list within an existing WG? I do think it is important that RIPE responds to the report in some way, otherwise RIPE will be considered as disinterested, and not necessarily engaged in future dialogue. Regards Steve Nash Steve.nash(a)theiet.org -----Original Message----- From: cooperation-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net [mailto:cooperation-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström Sent: 31 January 2013 12:34 To: Brian Nisbet Cc: cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net; anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [cooperation-wg] CleanIT Update Brian, I am sure many people on the coop wg is interested in this work, so thank you for copying the mailing list. Patrik Fältström Co-chair cooperation working group On 31 jan 2013, at 12:55, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie> wrote: > Colleagues, > > (And cross posted to the Cooperation WG as it may be something interesting for them also.) > > You may be aware of the the CleanIT project http://www.cleanitproject.eu/ > > This project has presented to the AA-WG at two RIPE meetings and Tobias and I said we would keep the working group up to date. The final document of the project was officially published yesterday in Brussels and handed over to the EU Counter Terrorism Coordinator Gilles de Kerchove. More information, including a download link for the document can be found here: > > http://www.cleanitproject.eu/final-document-clean-it-published/ > > It is unclear at present whether there will be any follow-up to the project, but various parties wish to investigate possibilities. > > If there are any further moves or projects to come out of this, we will let the AA-WG know. > > Brian >

4 3

CleanIT Update
by Brian Nisbet 31 Jan '13

31 Jan '13

Colleagues, (And cross posted to the Cooperation WG as it may be something interesting for them also.) You may be aware of the the CleanIT project http://www.cleanitproject.eu/ This project has presented to the AA-WG at two RIPE meetings and Tobias and I said we would keep the working group up to date. The final document of the project was officially published yesterday in Brussels and handed over to the EU Counter Terrorism Coordinator Gilles de Kerchove. More information, including a download link for the document can be found here: http://www.cleanitproject.eu/final-document-clean-it-published/ It is unclear at present whether there will be any follow-up to the project, but various parties wish to investigate possibilities. If there are any further moves or projects to come out of this, we will let the AA-WG know. Brian

2 1

RIPE NCC Report on IGF 2012
by Chris Buckridge 05 Dec '12

05 Dec '12

Dear colleagues, The seventh Internet Governance Forum took place in Baku, Azerbaijan from 6-9 November 2012, bringing together more than 1600 people from 128 countries. The RIPE NCC participated in the event, working with fellow Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and industry partners to develop the IGF program, organise workshops and contribute to discussions. Reports and session transcripts have now been published on the IGF website for the three workshops that the RIPE NCC was involved in organising: Workshop 99: Moving to IPv6: Challenges for Internet Governance (Organised by the Number Resource Organization (NRO)) http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/content/no99-moving-ipv6-challenges-internet-g… Workshop 100: Internet Governance and RPKI (Organised by the NRO) http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/content/no100-internet-governance-and-rpki#rep… Workshop 117: Best Common Practices for Building Internet Capacity (Organised by RIPE NCC, AFRINIC and the Arab IGF) http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/content/no117-best-common-practices-building-i… The RIPE NCC also contributed to workshops on Internet Exchange Point development (Workshop 159), Developing a National/Regional Framework of Principles for Internet Governance (Workshop 170), and two sessions discussing output from the Arab IGF. The main plenary session on Managing Critical Internet Resources (CIRs) considered issues surrounding the ICANN new gTLD program, Intergovernmentalism (focusing on the ITU, WCIT and the International Telecommunications Regulations) and IPv4 markets. Each of these discussions built on work done in earlier workshops, with APNIC Chief Scientist Geoff Huston representing the RIR community perspective on the panels. A transcript of this session is available at: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/114-preparatory-pr… Looking ahead, APNIC Director General Paul Wilson spoke to the Closing Ceremony, highlighting the ongoing concerns regarding IGF funding and the importance of maintaining the IGF as part of a broader, multi-stakeholder, bottom-up system of Internet governance. There were also calls from many participants for the IGF to take a more active role in defining and facilitating "Enhanced Cooperation", a key concept in Internet governance processes since the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in 2003. The next IGF will be held in late 2013 in Indonesia. Paul Rendek will continue in his role as a member of the Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), which will develop the themes and working methods for the event. There will also be opportunities for members of the general public to contribute feedback and ideas through Open Consultations, the first of which will take place at the UNESCO Headquarters in Paris on 28 February 2013. We welcome any questions or comments regarding the RIPE NCC's participation in IGF 2013 on the RIPE Cooperation Working Group mailing list. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

Euro-IX EC Position Statement on the Review of the ITRs
by Bijal Sanghani 06 Nov '12

06 Nov '12

Dear Cooperation WG Members, Today the Euro-IX Board posted a position statement on the review of the ITRs, please see details of the press release below - regards, Bijal === Euro-IX Executive Committee Position Statement on the Review of the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs) Amsterdam, The Netherlands 18 October 2012 In December 2012, the World Conference on International Telecommunications will consider a review of the International Telecommunication Regulations. As some proposed amendments may have a negative impact on the future of the Internet, the Euro-IX Board (Executive Committee) has prepared a Position Statement. The statement lists the points which are considered important to ensure the open, competitive and innovative nature of the Internet in the future. The Euro-IX Board has encouraged the members of Euro-IX to talk to their Government representatives and share the position statement with them and also with the members (customers, participants) of the exchange point. The position statement can be found in the link below - https://www.euro-ix.net/documents/1042-EuroIX-EC-WCIT-Position-Statement-pd… About Euro-IX: Euro-IX (European Internet Exchange Association) was formed in May 2001 with the intention to further develop, strengthen and improve the Internet Exchange Point (IXP) community. Euro-IX is a collaboration of the leading Internet Exchange Points that connect the networks of Internet service providers, carriers and content providers to facilitate the exchange of Internet traffic. https://euro-ix.net

2 1

Minutes from meeting at RIPE-65
by Patrik Fältström 18 Oct '12

18 Oct '12

All, Here are the minutes from the meeting at the last RIPE meeting. Thanks to specifically Chris that took the minutes. Regards, Patrik Co-chair, cooperation wg Cooperation Working Group Minutes [Draft] RIPE 65, Thursday, 27 September, 11:00 – 12:30 A. Discussion of ITU Issues - Input from RIPE 65 Plenary on Internet Governance & WCIT, Patrik Fältström Patrik summarised some of the issues raised in the Internet Governance and WCIT panel that took place in the RIPE 65 Plenary. He noted the importance of specific words in how we discuss Internet governance issues, including the word "governance" itself. He also noted questions from some network operators as to why they should take an interest in WCIT. He emphasised the need for all Internet stakeholders to engage with the public sector in their home country. - Process towards WCIT from a CEPT perspective, Anders Jönsson Anders Jönsson, former Chair of the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) Committee for ITU Policy (ComITU), presented an overview of that group and the regional preparation process leading up to WCIT. Maria Häll raised the question of who could participate in the various regional ITU preparatory meetings. Anders noted that different organisations have different rules: CEPT allows a number of observer organisations, including RIPE NCC, ETNO, ISOC, ICANN. The Asia Pacific Telecommunity (APT) applies the same principle, though their meetings often have 300-400 representatives, so they are organised differently to CEPT. Olaf Kolkman noted that while the CEPT states have made no proposals on certain Internet-related issues (as listed in Anders' slides), it is unclear whether the CEPT would push back against proposals on these issues from other regions, or may be willing to entertain others' proposals? Anders noted that while the CEPT negotiating position is based on certain high-level principles, once negotiation starts, all parties will need to prioritise what they hope to achieve in the ITRs. Carsten Schiefner asked about Criterion 1, "As an International Treaty, the ITRs should address high level strategic and policy issues" - to what extent does this make it impossible to make significant changes to the existing ITR text? Anders reiterated that the CEPT "guiding criteria" are a starting point, but that in the negotiation process there will necessarily need to be compromise. Patrik Fältström noted the potential of the revised ITRs to affect the role of the ITU itself. Anders agreed that the ITRs may have a significant affect on what the ITU does and how it works, as has in the past been demonstrated by other ITU agreements and international treaties. It is also clear that if you change the definitions of terms like "telecommunications" (to "telecommunications/ICT"), you change the scope of the ITU's work. Patrik also noted the ETNO proposal, and asked whether CEPT's Criterion 1 would prevent CEPT from supporting it. Anders noted that the CEPT will need to consider both whether the ETNO proposal raises issues that should be discussed in some forum, and whether it is appropriate for such issues to be addressed via the ITRs. Tahar Schaa noted that the Internet was built by private companies in a transparent manner, and that many in the Internet community do not see any justification for limiting transparency in Member States' Internet governance discussions. Anders noted that CEPT has aimed to limit their discussions to issues between Member States, rather than those issues which directly affect individuals. Anders also directed people to a recent discussion held at the UN in New York between several high level government and ITU representatives [available at http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/25722111] Paul Rendek thanked Anders for his role in inviting RIPE NCC and other industry partners to take part in the CEPT Com-ITU. - What is happening re WCIT: Definitions of Operating Agencies, Telecommunication etc., Phil Rushton Phil discussed the definitions being discussed in WCIT discussions, and noted the significance of changing these definitions or trying to apply them to contemporary technologies. Some of the definitions currently being examined in preparatory meetings are "Recognised Operating Agency" (which some are pushing to change to "Operating Agency") and "telecommunication" (which may be changed to "telecommunication/ICT", and may be expanded to include all "processing" of communications). - Looking ahead to WTPF, Cathy Handley Cathy discussed the ITU World Telecommunication Policy Forum, which will take place in May 2013. The sole input document is a Secretary-General's report, which will reflect input from an Informal Experts Group (IEG), of which Cathy and APNIC Director General Paul Wilson are members. The Number Resource Organization (NRO, representing the five RIRs) has submitted a document correcting some confusion about IP addressing issues. Cathy noted that the IEG is a non-decisional group, but that non-ITU members can follow and contribute to it via community representatives. Olaf Kolkman noted that the potential impact of the WTPF (and other ITU events) remains quite vague. Cathy committed to send some additional information to the Cooperation WG list. Maria Häll asked about any connection between WTPF, WCIT and the ITRs. Cathy noted that the WTPF is part of a much larger chain of events (including the World Telecommunication Development Conference and Plenipotentiary Conference, both in 2014). The WTPF, however, is one of the few forums where non-members can participate, and is therefore an important opportunity. Andrew Sullivan sounded a sceptical note regarding whether Internet technical community contributions would even be included in the Secretary-General's report. Dmitry Burkov questioned how some of the proposed changes to the ITRs could be implemented in reality. He noted that the US did not even ratify the 1988 ITRs, and for the revised ITRs to have a significant impact they would need to be ratified and integrated into national legislation in all ITU Member States. Maria noted that the language and method of implementation will be decided as part of the negotiation process. Dmitry noted that he doesn't see any real consequences coming out of this work. Maria thanked Cathy and Paul Wilson for their work in the WTPF Informal Experts Group. - Updates from Regional ITU groups (including Arab States), Paul Rendek Paul gave an update on some of the other regional preparations going on, including RIPE NCC's participation in CEPT, and RIPE NCC's cooperation with AFRINIC to contribute to the Arab Group. He noted that a significant issue is the breadth of the language being used, and that the RIRs will have a strong delegation going to Dubai for WCIT-12. Wout de Natris recalled the recent Council of Europe Octopus meeting on cybercrime, and the Russian delegation's statement that they would not sign the Budapest Convention on cybercrime, but would instead rely on the ITU. Dmitry Burkov later noted that in relation to the Budapest Convention, the Russian opposition was based on quite specific issues with the Convention that affect national sovereignty. Meredith Whittaker echoed the point that the Internet technical community is not defining the potential threats clearly enough, and people need to understand what is at stake. She noted that the pushback to SOPA/PIPA legislation in the US was the result of effectively engaging and educating Internet users. Rob Blokzijl noted that half of the current ITRs list government reservations, and suggested that the contemporary environment may result in a treaty with many more reservations. Maria also noted that the status of the ITRs (mandatory or optional) is one item for negotiation. Fahad AlShirawi noted that most governments are driven by a fear of something they have no control over, and need to be reminded of the benefits that the Internet in its open form has brought them. - Modern Paradigm for Global Standards Development, Andrei Robachevsky Andrei gave an overview of the OpenStand project, which is dedicated to promoting a jointly developed and proven set of principles that establish The Modern Paradigm for Standards. Maria Häll asked if the ITU had endorsed the OpenStand principles. Andrei noted they have not at this stage, and that standards organisations that wish to sign on should provide a statement of how they live up to these ideals. - Building on the Success of the IGF: Paul Rendek gave an overview of the planning underway for the global Internet Governance Forum, which will take place in Baku in November 2012, and the first Arab IGF, which will take place in Kuwait in October 2012. - AOB Steve Nash noted that the Internet technical community cannot pretend that governments are going to go away, and that they need to continue to find ways to allow governments to take an active interest in Internet governance. He noted that while the ITU may not be the ideal vehicle for government involvement, there may need to be new international organisations developed.

1 0

First Arab IGF now happening
by Chris Buckridge 09 Oct '12

09 Oct '12

Dear colleagues, The first Arab Internet Governance Forum event is now taking place in Kuwait. It will run for three days, from 9-11 October. The program is available at: http://arabigf.kits.org.kw/program/ You can follow events via webcast and contribute via chat on the Arab IGF website: http://arabigf.kits.org.kw/livestream/ The RIPE NCC is proud to be a supporter and sponsor of the Arab IGF. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

WTPF-13 IEG
by Gordon Lennox 27 Sep '12

27 Sep '12

Informal Experts Group In accordance with the Council Decision 562, the Secretary-General will convene a balanced, informal group of experts(IEG) - who are active in preparing for the Forum in their own country - to assist in the successive stages of the preparatory process. At its session in 2012, the Council agreed that all relevant stakeholders should participate in the work of the IEG so as to contribute their unique perspective to the preparatory process, based on the roles and responsibilities that the stakeholders may have under Paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda (2005). Consequently, participation in the work of the IEG will be open to stakeholders in accordance with Council decision, taking into account Decision 562 and the need to maintain a balanced group of experts, and also room and seating capacity for IEG meetings at ITU headquarters in Geneva. Relevant stakeholders are invited to express their interest in participating in the work of the IEG by completing a request form. ..... http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx

2 1

Fwd: [WCIT] WCIT Briefing Session for Civil Society Stakeholders - at ITU (in Geneva)
by Gordon Lennox 22 Sep '12

22 Sep '12

Begin forwarded message: > From: "Najarian, Paul B" <NajarianPB(a)STATE.GOV> > Subject: [WCIT] WCIT Briefing Session for Civil Society Stakeholders - at ITU (in Geneva) > Date: 22 September, 2012 05:05:02 CEST > To: <WCIT(a)LMLIST.STATE.GOV> > Reply-To: "Najarian, Paul B" <NajarianPB(a)STATE.GOV> > > On Sep. 19, the ITU issued an invitation for a WCIT-12 briefing session for Civil Society, which will be held on October 9, from 3 to 4:30 pm (GVA time), at the ITU (in Geneva). > > This session is in conjunction with the WCIT and WTSA preparatory information session, on Oct. 8 and 9. > > Registration deadline is 5 October, and is open. > > Remote participation is available upon request (make your request with the ITU). > > Additional information and a link to Registration is available at the following: > > http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/WCIT%20Briefing%20Session%20for%20C… > > > > > Paul Najarian > U.S. Department of State > Bureau of Economic, Energy and Business Affairs (EEB) > Communication and Information Policy (CIP) > 2201 C Street, NW; Rm-5806 > Washington, DC 20520 > Tel: 202-647-7847 > Fax: 202-647-0158 >

1 0

Update on the EU Clean-IT project
by Bastiaan Goslings 21 Sep '12

21 Sep '12

All, See below - might be of interest to this group too. A 'CleanIT project update' is on the AA WG agenda - unfortunately this session on the 27th clashes with the Roundtable Meeting. Regards, -- Bastiaan Goslings AMS-IX Governance and Policy Officer Begin forwarded message: > From: Erik Bais <erik(a)bais.name> > Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Update on the EU Clean-IT project > Date: September 21, 2012 1:17:09 PM GMT+02:00 > To: "anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net" <anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net> > > Hi, > > The EU Clean-IT project did a presentation on RIPE64. > EDRI (European Digital Rights) was informed via a leaked document on the projects wishlist and planned (internal) discussion topics and current recommendations. > > They posted a summary on their website: http://www.edri.org/cleanIT > > The document itself can be found here: http://www.edri.org/files/cleanIT_sept2012.pdf > > If this is where the EU regulation is moving towards, under the umbrella of terrorism …. Oh boy ... > > Regards, > Erik Bais

1 0

Next week is RIPE Meeting
by Patrik Fältström 21 Sep '12

21 Sep '12

All, Next week is the RIPE Meeting and we have a meeting on Thursday. The agenda is updated over time so please have a look now and then. The over arching topic for "cooperation issues" is this time "global governance in a multistakeholder world" and specifically this is triggered by WCIT and the question of what a treaty really implies, and what such can (and can not) include and why. The discussions start on Tuesday where there will be I hope an interesting panel on the topic. See https://ripe65.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/plenary-agenda/ > Tuesday, 25 September 16:00 – 17:30 > > Plenary > > Internet Governance Update Panel > Patrik Fältström, Cooperation Working Group Chair > > Mike Blanche, Google > Cathy Handley, ARIN > Gordon Lennox, Former official of the European Commission > Christine Runnegar, ISOC The goal is that this will be a discussion panel. I will moderate, ask questions of course that triggers the discussion, but I also welcome either before or during the meeting suggestions. We will then on Thursday on the cooperation wg continue this with more discussions in the wg. This time the working group meeting will be part of what RIPE call "government roundtable meeting" where also the address policy wg is included. We hope this will attract more non-traditional RIPE delegates to the meeting itself. We do hope this will be interesting for us all, and we are looking forward to next week. Regards, Patrik & Maria Co-chairs Cooperation Working Group

1 0

First Arab IGF, 9-11 October in Kuwait
by Paul Rendek 11 Sep '12

11 Sep '12

Dear colleagues, The first Arab Internet Governance Forum (IGF) event will take place in Kuwait, running from 9-11 October. Based on the model of multi-stakeholder dialogue and governance that has underpinned the global IGF over six years, this event marks a significant new opportunity for all Internet stakeholders in the region to participate more fully in Internet governance, and to focus on issues of specific relevance to the Arab region. The RIPE NCC is proud to be a major supporter and sponsor of the Arab Internet Governance Forum. We strongly encourage members of the Internet technical community to take an active role in this event and help to ensure that the fundamental concerns of those who have developed and operate networks are represented. The RIPE NCC is working with industry partners, including AFRINIC, to organise several sessions as part of the event, on topics including Critical Internet Resources (CIR), IPv6 deployment and best practices for Internet capacity building. Even if you are unable to attend, there will be opportunities for you to contribute remotely to these discussions. All relevant information, including online registration, can be found on the website of the host organisation, the Kuwait Information Technology Society (KITS): http://arabigf.kits.org.kw/ Fellowship program ------------------------- The Arab IGF Secretariat is offering fellowships covering airfare or accommodation for a number of attendees. If you are interested in applying for one of these fellowships, please read the attached document on eligibility, and complete the attached application form. If you are interested in contributing to any of the sessions listed in the draft agenda, you can contact the local host organisation or the RIPE NCC. Industry sponsorship is also welcome, and we encourage anyone with an interest in sponsoring to make contact with the local host organisation. Best regards, Paul Rendek Director of External Relations, RIPE NCC

1 0

Internet governance hits mainstream media
by Jim Reid 23 Aug '12

23 Aug '12

Here's a fairly interesting piece here about the upcoming IGF and ITR meetings: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/22/fight-control-internet-… Shame about the hype about "secretive UN agencies" and "ITU to take over the interweb" threads though. This might be because of the author's affiliation. YMMV.

1 0

First Arab IGF: New Website, Online Registration Now Open
by Chris Buckridge 22 Aug '12

22 Aug '12

Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC is proud to be a major supporter and sponsor of the Arab Internet Governance Forum, which will hold its first meeting from 9-11 October at the Regency Hotel in Kuwait. Online registration for the event is now open, via the host website: http://arabigf.kits.org.kw Please note that a call for workshops at the first meeting of the Arab IGF is still open. Interested parties are encouraged to submit workshop proposals using the template available at: http://igfarab.org/index.php/latest-news/item/download/1_4cf80222a902be64a1… [Word] Proposals should be submitted by email to <workshops(a)igfarab.org> by 31 August 2012. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

an unwelcome ITR development?
by Jim Reid 17 Aug '12

17 Aug '12

http://wcitleaks.org is publishing contributions (ITU-speak for discussion papers, agenda items, etc) which are likely to be discussed at the ITR meeting in December. According to http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/Russia%2040.pdf, Russia wants the ITU to effectively become an RIR and allocate IPv6 addresses. See item 8 at the bottom of page 3 of their list of changes to the ITR Articles. Looks like someone's been drinking the Nav6 Kool- Aid. Sigh. Will the NCC as a Sector Member, (and the other RIRs?) submit a response to this? Should concerned members of this WG be contacting their governments?

7 12

European Commission Open Consultations
by Chris Buckridge 27 Jul '12

27 Jul '12

Dear colleagues, The European Commission this week launched two public consultations that members of this working group may have an interest in responding to: - On-line public consultation on "specific aspects of transparency, traffic management and switching in an Open Internet" http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/digital-agenda/actions/oit-consulta… - On-line public consultation on Improving Network and Information Security (NIS) in the EU http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch?form=securitystrategy2 The final date for submissions on both open consultations is 15 October 2012. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

ISOC Paper on Interconnection Arrangements
by Patrik Fältström 26 Jul '12

26 Jul '12

Hi, ISOC has, based on the number of proposals for WCIT calling for special provisions in the ITRs written a document that I think would be interesting for the participants of the cooperation wg. Sally of ISOC writes: > Dear colleagues, > > In recent months, a number of proposals have come forward in the WCIT process that call for provisions to be included in the ITRs to create a new model of Internet interconnection that would establish an end-to-end quality of service delivery mechanism with pre-defined end-to-end performance objectives, and; to establish a system of settlements between network operators based on sending-party-network-pays. > > ISOC has great concerns with these are proposals and we thought that an analysis might be useful for the community and for policy makers. This analysis is attached. There have been many comments on the various mailing lists about these issues and those comments have been quite useful in helping to shape this paper - so, thank you! We fully expect this analysis to evolve in the run-up to the WCIT as the proposals to the Conference also evolve. > > http://www.internetsociety.org/internet-interconnections-commercial-arrange… > > In the meantime, we hope that you find this to be useful. We are working to translate the document now. > > Best Regards, > Sally > Patrik Fältström co-chair cooperation wg

1 0

Update on ITU Activity
by Chris Buckridge 13 Jul '12

13 Jul '12

Dear colleagues, This year has already brought a deluge of news and commentary about the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), but I wanted to share a couple of recent developments that may be of interest to the members of this Working Group. ITU IPv6 Group --------------------- Established by ITU Council in 2009, this group was tasked with reporting on a number of issues raised by ITU Member States regarding the distribution of IPv6 address space and the deployment of IPv6. Further details about the group, including its full Terms of Reference, can be found here: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/others/ipv6/Pages/default.aspx At the fourth meeting of the ITU IPv6 Group in June 2012, the participants agreed that the group's mission, as laid out in the Terms of Reference, had been fulfilled. The report of that meeting recommended that ITU Council officially close the group, and Council has now accepted and acted upon this recommendation. Also contained in the report of the fourth meeting were the following findings: • That "current IPv6 allocation policies and processes met the needs of stakeholders." • That "future work of IPv6 human capacity building activities and project on technical, policy and economic aspects of the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 will be continued and led by ITU-BDT in collaboration with interested partner entities (RIRs, NAv6, Cisco, etc.) and partner States (Czech Republic, Sudan, Sweden, etc.)." WCIT and the ITRs -------------------------- The most recent ITU Council meeting also discussed the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) and the revision of the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs). The Internet technical community (including the RIPE NCC and other RIRs) and other ITU stakeholders have been arguing strongly for greater openness and transparency in the WCIT process. Council has now agreed to make public the working draft of the revised ITRs (CWG-WCIT TD-64), although access to the individual proposals will remain restricted to ITU Members. The ITU Secretariat will post the draft ITRs online at: http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Pages/default.aspx Finally, the RIPE NCC has updated the ITU-related information on its website, which now includes links to a number of articles by APNIC Chief Scientist Geoff Huston that are relevant to discussion of the ITRs: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/internet-governance/multi-stakeh… If you have any questions regarding the RIPE NCC's engagement with the ITU, we are happy to discuss the subject on this mailing list (<cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net>). Best regards, Chris Buckridge, RIPE NCC

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: Perspectives on the ITR Revisions
by Mirjam Kuehne 25 Jun '12

25 Jun '12

Dear colleagues, Please find two new articles on RIPE Labs contributed by APNIC Chief Scientist Geoff Huston: 1. Occam's ITRs https://labs.ripe.net/Members/gih/occams-itrs In this article Geoff talks about the upcoming review of the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs) and how this could potentially affect your network operations. 2. The QoS Emperor's Wardrobe https://labs.ripe.net/Members/gih/the-qos-emperors-wardrobe This article looks at the history and status of Quality of Service (QoS). Recent proposals for revising the ITRs have suggested basing a new IP interconnection framework around the concept of end-to-end Quality of Service. Kind regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

RIPE NCC Submission to CEPT Com-ITU
by Chris Buckridge 23 May '12

23 May '12

Dear colleagues, As noted during the Cooperation Working Group session at RIPE 64, the RIPE NCC was recently granted observer status in the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) Committee for ITU Policy (ComITU). This committee organises the coordination of CEPT actions and positions in relation to various ITU activities, including the development of Common European Proposals (CEPs) in the lead-up to WCIT-12 and the revision of the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs). Following discussions between various members of the RIPE community, RIPE NCC staff and European government representatives, the RIPE NCC has submitted a document for the consideration of CEPT Member States at this week's Com-ITU meeting. The submission discusses the potential consequences for the Internet industry of proposals to include Calling Line Identification (CLI) regulation in the ITRs. The Internet Society and ICANN, both observers in the CEPT Com-ITU, have also signed on in support of this submission. The full text of the document is available at: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/internet-governance/multi-stakeh… If you have any questions or comments, please post them to this working group list, or privately to chrisb(a)ripe.net. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

2 1

Minutes from coop wg at RIPE-64
by Patrik Fältström 02 May '12

02 May '12

Hi All, You can find minutes of the previous meeting for the cooperation working group published as <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/coop/minutes/ripe-64> If there are questions or otherwise issues that someone have with the minutes, do not hesitate contacting me. Regards, Patrik Fältström co-chair of the Cooperation WG

1 0

Time to register to EuroDIG 14-15 June
by Erika.Hersaeus＠pts.se 19 Apr '12

19 Apr '12

Welcome to join the European Dialogue on Internet Governance 14-15 June, 2012 in Stockholm, Sweden The Swedish Post and Telecom Authority (PTS) is happy to invite you to participate at EuroDIG, European Dialogue on Internet Governance, on June 14-15, 2012 in Stockholm, Sweden. EuroDIG is an open and transparent multi-stakeholder forum and gives a great opportunity to meet representatives across the sectors of society - governments, business and industry as well as civil society alike - to discuss public policy issues of Internet's future, its challenges and opportunities. Confirmed speakers are Her Majesty the Queen of Sweden, Vice President of the European Commisson, Ms Neelie Kroes, Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Carl Bildt, Swedish Minister for Information Technology and Energy, Ms Anna-Karin Hatt, besides a wide range of other stake holders. For draft program and more information: http://www.eurodig.org/ To register: http://www.eurodig.org/important/registration-open-2 We look forward to seeing you in Stockholm! ______________________________ Lise Alkerstedt Adviser Swedish Post and Telecom Authority (PTS) Office of the Director-General Phone: +46 8 678 55 30 Mobile: +46 73 644 55 30 lise.alkerstedt(a)pts.se<mailto:lise.alkerstedt@pts.se> www.pts.se<http://www.pts.se/> PTS works to ensure that everyone in Sweden shall have access to efficient, affordable and secure communications services.

1 0

Possible agenda topic - EU funded research
by Gordon Lennox 19 Jan '12

19 Jan '12

The Commission like other similar organisations has its “cycles”. Some are fairly clean-cut such as the Commission itself – the College, the 27 Commissioners. Others are overlap to an extent. This coming year is perhaps more interesting than most when it comes to our research funding. We are coming towards the end of Framework Programme 7 - FP7 - and a proposal has been developed for what should happen next - Horizon 2020. For details on FP7: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/home And for some information on Horizon 2020: http://ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020/index_en.cfm?pg=h2020 A lot of the topics which have been and are being funded and which indeed may be funded are of relevance to this community – work on the “future internet” and on IPv6 to mention but two. It ought to be useful therefore to see if people from the research side of INFSO could come to a RIPE meeting to present what has been achieved and the Commission’s proposal for the future. If there is interest then I am sure the co-chairs can take this forward. In the meantime - happy new year! Gordon

3 4

CSTD Working Group meeting happening now
by Chris Buckridge 12 Jan '12

12 Jan '12

Dear colleagues, At the last meeting of the Cooperation WG, there was an update from Nurani Nimpuno on the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). This group is currently meeting, and a number of RIPE community members are tweeting live updates from the meeting. For those that are interested, search for #CSTDWG on Twitter. More information on this group is available at: http://www.unctad.info/en/CstdWG/ Best regards, Chris Buckridge, RIPE NCC

2 1

Re: [cooperation-wg] Possible agenda topic - EU funded research
by Michiel Ettema 12 Jan '12

12 Jan '12

Hi Gordon, We are a participant in the FP7 GEN6 (Governements enabled with IPv6) program. If there are any questions of the RIPE community you'd like to ask there I can help to direct them to the appropriate people. Regards, Michiel ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:09:07 +0100 From: Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13(a)gmail.com> Subject: [cooperation-wg] Possible agenda topic - EU funded research To: cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net Message-ID: <CAP1z8s8gf9vRb0jgBHC2tBHJkCMayLxKXbu1sAxmioR2sGMQkQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 The Commission like other similar organisations has its ?cycles?. Some are fairly clean-cut such as the Commission itself ? the College, the 27 Commissioners. Others are overlap to an extent. This coming year is perhaps more interesting than most when it comes to our research funding. We are coming towards the end of Framework Programme 7 - FP7 - and a proposal has been developed for what should happen next - Horizon 2020. For details on FP7: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/home And for some information on Horizon 2020: http://ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020/index_en.cfm?pg=h2020 A lot of the topics which have been and are being funded and which indeed may be funded are of relevance to this community ? work on the ?future internet? and on IPv6 to mention but two. It ought to be useful therefore to see if people from the research side of INFSO could come to a RIPE meeting to present what has been achieved and the Commission?s proposal for the future. If there is interest then I am sure the co-chairs can take this forward. In the meantime - happy new year! Gordon ================================================================== ================================================================== Disclaimer Gemeente Alkmaar: Aan dit mailbericht kunnen geen rechten ontleend worden. No rights can be derived from the contents of this E-mail message. ==================================================================

2 1

Cloud computing / new documents
by Andrea.GLORIOSO＠ec.europa.eu 13 Dec '11

13 Dec '11

Dear all, in the context of the development of the European Cloud Computing strategy, which was briefly referred to in this mailing list, you may be interested to know that the following documents have been recently published on the website of the European Commission: - Final report of the public consultation on Cloud Computing (16 May - 31 August 2011) http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/cloudcomputing/docs/ccco… - Recommendations from the "select industry group" to the European Commission on the orientation of a Cloud Computing strategy for Europe http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/cloudcomputing/docs/indu… http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/cloudcomputing/docs/anne… (annexes) Best regards, -- Andrea Glorioso (Mr) European Commission - DG Information Society and Media Unit A3 (Internet; Network and Information Security) Avenue de Beaulieu 33 (2/84) / B-1049 / Brussels / Belgium T: +32-2-29-97682 M: +32-460-797-682 E: Andrea.Glorioso(a)ec.europa.eu Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro The views expressed above are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Les opinions exprimées ci-dessus n'engagent que leur auteur et ne sauraient en aucun cas être assimilées à une position officielle de la Commission européenne. Be transparent - Sign up to the European Commission's Register of Interest Representatives http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regrin

1 0

"No Disconnect Strategy"
by Gordon Lennox 13 Dec '11

13 Dec '11

A press release, some aspects of which I presume are of particular interest to this group: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/1525&format=H…

3 2

Work Programme 2012 of the European Commission published
by Andrea.GLORIOSO＠ec.europa.eu 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Dear all, as I mentioned during my presentation at RIPE 63, one of the main tools to know what the European Commission is planning to do / is doing is the so-called Commission Work Programme or CWP. You might be interested to know that on 15 November, the European Commission published its CWP for 2012. You can find all the documents at http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/index_en.htm. What you may probably be more interested in is the so-called Annex I, which lists with some more detail the specific "key initiatives" of the CWP (see http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/docs/cwp2012_annex_en.pdf). The Annex is divided by "policy themes". RIPE members may possibly be interested in the actions under the "Digital Agenda" theme (21-25), as well as action 60 (Fighting European Cybercrime), 87 (On-line gambling in the Internal Market), 91 (Initiative on notice and takedown procedures). Or also other initiatives, depending on your tastes. :) Two further points: - Annex I to the CWP includes what you may think of as "major" initiatives, but is not per se a full and exhaustive list of everything the Commission is planning to do. - Further details on (most of) the initiatives in Annex I of the CWP, as well as on other initiatives which are not in Annex I of the CWP but the Commission is nonetheless working on, are available via so-called "roadmaps" at http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/roadmaps_2012_en.htm. The list of "roadmaps" (and also, as a matter of fact, the CWP) is updated on a rolling basis. I hope this is, if not useful, at least mildly interesting. Please let me know if I can provide further information, noting however that (a) the management of the CWP is not under the responsibility of DG Information Society and Media, but of the General Secretariat of the Commission; and that (b) I may not be personally involved in all the initiatives I mentioned above, and certainly not in all the initiatives in Annex I. Nonetheless, I'll be happy to help with providing the relevant contacts, should the need arise. Best, -- Andrea Glorioso (Mr) European Commission - DG Information Society and Media Unit A3 (Internet; Network and Information Security) Avenue de Beaulieu 33 (2/84) / B-1049 / Brussels / Belgium T: +32-2-29-97682 M: +32-460-797-682 E: Andrea.Glorioso(a)ec.europa.eu Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro The views expressed above are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Les opinions exprimées ci-dessus n'engagent que leur auteur et ne sauraient en aucun cas être assimilées à une position officielle de la Commission européenne. Be transparent - Sign up to the European Commission's Register of Interest Representatives http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regrin

5 8

Interaction between Dutch police and RIPE NCC
by Patrik Fältström 02 Dec '11

02 Dec '11

Hi, I presume many of you have seen this original story on the RIPE website from Nov 9: http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/about-ripe-ncc-and-ripe/ripe… > RIPE NCC Blocks Registration in RIPE Registry Following Order from Dutch Police > 09 Nov 2011 > The RIPE NCC received a temporary order from the Dutch police to prevent any changes from being made to a registration of four specific blocks of IPv4 address space in the RIPE Registry. > > The order is effective from 8 November 2011 until 22 March 2012. This has been updated with new information on Nov 16: http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/about-ripe-ncc-and-ripe/ripe… > The RIPE NCC is receiving independent legal advice and is in discussion with the appropriate authorities. It is the intention of the RIPE NCC to pursue this matter further in Dutch court to establish a precedent so that it is certain of its rights regarding such orders. > > In the interest of transparency, the RIPE NCC is working on full disclosure of the background documents. The RIPE NCC will update the community if and when any other publishable materials become available. > > The RIPE NCC is committed to acting in the best interest of its membership and will continue to inform the Internet community on this matter as it progresses. > > The RIPE NCC has not withdrawn, removed or reclaimed the address blocks in question; it has temporarily locked a registration of address blocks. On this last page there is also a link to the police order itself: http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/member-support/police-order-8-november-2011 Patrik Fältström Co-chair, Cooperation Working Group

2 1

Filtering and Blocking
by Gordon Lennox 22 Nov '11

22 Nov '11

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2011/11/20/filtering-and-blocking-closer-to-… An interesting article from Monika that mentions/quotes a number of knowledgeable people. Gordon

1 0

Big step forward at discussions of WTO
by Patrik Fältström 21 Nov '11

21 Nov '11

Might also be interesting... Patrik Russia to cancel licensing of imported IT product, zero out duties - WTO GENEVA. (Interfax) - In the context of its accession to the World Trade Organization, Russia will remove restrictions on imported digital (cryptographic) equipment, and will also zero out import duties on high-tech goods. Licensing will not be need for dozens more products with cryptography, including wireless communications devices, electronic digital signatures, and smart cards, a WTO statement says. There will be no new restrictions, including expert evaluation, approval and licensing, the statement says. For devices for which the licensing of their import is retained, the procedures will be done only once. The rules for bringing digital devices into the Customs Union were integrated at the beginning of last year. Since then, importers have been obligated to obtain licensing or do notification of each model (cellphone, laptop computers, and so on) that supports cryptography. The notifica-tion is done by the producer of certain devices at Russia's Center for Licensing, and certification and the protection of state secrets by the FSB. Receiving licensing is not to take more than ninety days.

1 0

Re: [cooperation-wg] Interaction between Dutch police and RIPE NCC
by Peter Koch 20 Nov '11

20 Nov '11

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 09:35:30AM +0100, Patrik Fältström wrote: > http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/member-support/police-order-8-november-2011 the IP address ranges in this copy are concealed. Coincidentally, looking up addresses published in <http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/november/malware_110911/DNS-changer-ma…> as referred to by <http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/november/malware_110911/malware_110911> will provide some detail. -Peter

2 1

Material from the European Commission
by Andrea Glorioso 03 Nov '11

03 Nov '11

Dear all, thanks for the opportunity to (start to) discuss cooperation opportunities between the European Commission and RIPE NCC, as well as for your flexibility in listening to me via phone. I do hope there will a chance to meet in person soon. As promised during my presentation, please find below the additional information on the activities of the European Commission: - Commission Work Programme: http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/index_en.htm - Commission at work: material that explains how the Commission discusses and takes decision: http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/index_en.htm - Public consultations by the Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/index_en.htm As well as my contact details: Email (work): andrea.glorioso(a)ec.europa.eu Email (home): andrea(a)digitalpolicy.it Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://facebook.com/andreaglorioso Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/pub/andrea-glorioso/1/56a/178 Diaspora: https://joindiaspora.com/u/andreaglorioso Tel: +32-2-299-7682 GSM: +32-460-79-7682 I understand this information will be included in the "slides pack" you will receive at the end of the RIPE meeting. Please, do not hesitate get in touch with me whenever you need. Best regards, Andrea Glorioso

2 1

Material from the European Commission
by Andrea Glorioso 03 Nov '11

03 Nov '11

Dear all, thanks for the opportunity to (start to) discuss cooperation opportunities between the European Commission and RIPE NCC, as well as for your flexibility in listening to me via phone. I do hope there will a chance to meet in person soon. As promised during my presentation, please find below the additional information on the activities of the European Commission: - Commission Work Programme: http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/programmes/index_en.htm - Commission at work: material that explains how the Commission discusses and takes decision: http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/index_en.htm - Public consultations by the Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/index_en.htm As well as my contact details: Email (work): andrea.glorioso(a)ec.europa.eu Email (home): andrea(a)digitalpolicy.it Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://facebook.com/andreaglorioso Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/pub/andrea-glorioso/1/56a/178 Diaspora: https://joindiaspora.com/u/andreaglorioso Tel: +32-2-299-7682 GSM: +32-460-79-7682 I understand this information will be included in the "slides pack" you will receive at the end of the RIPE meeting. Please, do not hesitate get in touch with me whenever you need. Best regards, Andrea Glorioso

1 0

Presentation at RIPE meeting
by Patrik Fältström 18 Oct '11

18 Oct '11

Gordon, If I understand things correctly, you will be on site in Vienna. I have talked with you, and you have been cc:ed, on various communication and tries we have made from RIPE community on getting people from COM and specifically INFSO participating at the RIPE meeting. You can see one summary I have of this here: http://stupid.domain.name/node/1459 Now, the question to you is whether you are interested in presenting at the cooperation wg? There seems to be some confusion from COM side what RIPE is, and we do not understand COM. You are one of the few that understand both sides. Maybe you can talk and present, and do whatever you think is needed to maybe bridge the gap that might exist. Or let me phrase it differently: You are a man with opinion. If we give you 20-30 minutes of time including discussions, are you interested in using it for something interesting for whoever will come to the meeting? Patrik

2 1

Agenda item, CSTD wg in Vienna?
by Patrik Fältström 18 Oct '11

18 Oct '11

Nurani, On the Thursday of the RIPE week is the cooperation wg. One of the agenda items we would like to have a description of the CSTD wg (non) process. Are you interested in, willing to, etc do it? 5 min, i.e. short... Patrik

3 7

IPv6 Deployment in European Public Authorities
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 16 Oct '11

16 Oct '11

Hi all, On 28th of October, the 6DEPLOY-2 project, in cooperation with the European Commission, during the Future Internet Week, in Poznan (Poland), is organizing a workshop under the topic "IPv6 Deployment in European Public Authorities". Please register at http://www.week.fi-poznan.eu/6deploy/page/1518/Agenda_details.html to join us. If you are interested in getting a slot in the agenda, please, let me know in private email. Regards, Jordi ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

1 0

NRO IGF Workshop Starting Shortly
by Chris Buckridge 28 Sep '11

28 Sep '11

Dear colleagues, The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) workshop entitled "Enhancing Understanding: Facilitating Internet Governance Through Openness and Transparency" will start in one hour, at 08:00 UTC (11:00 in Nairobi). If you would like to take part remotely, you can join the WebEx session from the following URL: http://j.mp/IGF11D2R4 More information on this workshop is available at: http://www.nro.net/news/internet-governance-forum-2011-in-nairobi-kenya Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

Internet Governance Forum next week
by Chris Buckridge 21 Sep '11

21 Sep '11

Dear colleagues, The sixth Internet Governance Forum (IGF) takes place in Nairobi, Kenya, next week, running from 27-30 September. The RIPE NCC, participating with the other Regional Internet Registries as the Number Resource Organization (NRO), will be organising two workshops in the IGF schedule. Workshop 166. Enhancing Understanding: Facilitating Internet Governance Through Openness and Transparency Wednesday, 28 September, 11:00 -12:30 (UTC+3) Following on from an NRO workshop at last year's IGF entitled "Enhancing Transparency", this workshop will consider some of the issues raised in that discussion and look at strategies for improving understanding between different Internet stakeholder groups. Workshop 165. Understanding IPv6 Deployment and Transition Thursday, 29 September, 9:00-10:30 (UTC+3) This workshop will focus on IPv6 capacity building, remaining obstacles to IPv6 adoption and strategies that have proved successful in encouraging IPv6 adoption. For those not attending the IGF in person, remote participation is available in both of these workshops (and all other IGF sessions). Increased opportunities for remote participation is something that the NRO has argued for in discussions about the future of the IGF, and we would very much welcome remote contributions to the discussion. More information on how to access the remote participation can be found at: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation-2011 More information on the two NRO-organised workshops is available at: http://www.nro.net/news/internet-governance-forum-2011-in-nairobi-kenya Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

'European Commission calls for greater government control over Internet'
by Bastiaan Goslings 08 Sep '11

08 Sep '11

Hi Cooperation WG, I came across http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/08/31/ec-greater-government-control and decided it was a good enough reason for a first post to the list. 'Among a long series of measures promoted in no less than six papers by the EC’s Information Society and Media Directorate-General are: • A government veto over any new Internet extensions • The creation of a list of names, drawn up by governments, that would be banned from registration • Significant structural changes at overseeing organization ICANN, including at Board level and in the crucial IANA contract • An obligation for ICANN to follow governments’ advice unless deemed illegal or damaging to the Internet’s stability • Two new bodies to oversee ICANN decision-making and finances Combined together, the measures would provide governments with de facto control over the Internet’s naming systems and bring an end to the independent and autonomous approach that has defined the Internet’s domain name system since its inception.' The papers 'are billed as “informal background papers” and have not yet been published.' (For an 'analysis' see http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/08/31/ec-papers-analysis: 'Together the papers represent a wholesale effort to put governments in charge of the Internet.') I am not an ICANN-watcher myself, nor am I aware of the nitty-gritty details of DNS-related discussions that go on in different (EU) fora. So it is hard for me to judge the merits of these .nxt articles. And maybe it is indeed just 'informal background' stuff. But this does sound quite serious though and, if it is, it comes as a surprise that I haven't seen it being mentioned elsewhere a lot... Any thoughts? Cheers, -- Bastiaan Goslings AMS-IX Governance and Policy Officer AMS-IX B.V. tel: +31 (0)20 514 1712 Westeinde 12 fax: +31 (0)20 305 8990 1017 ZN Amsterdam http://www.ams-ix.net bastiaan.goslings(a)ams-ix.net

7 9

Minutes Cooperation WG 4 May 2011
by maria.hall＠enterprise.ministry.se 30 Jun '11

30 Jun '11

Cooperation WG Wednesday, 4 May 2011 ? 14:00 Co-Chair Maria Häll introduced the agenda. The minutes of the previous Cooperation WG session were approved. B. Internet Intermediaries ? Moderators: Paul Rendek, Patrik Fältström - Introduction: Patrik Fältström - Internet Intermediaries - The human rights perspective - Striking a balance between integrity/neutrality, law enforcement, business Niall O?Reilly noted the importance of understanding how these three factors (neutrality, law enforcement and business) affect each other, and that the ?best? balance between them may favour two out of three. Patrik agreed that this was an important calculation, but one that is not widely enough discussed. Benedikt Stokkeland noted that there is a need for regulation in some areas that is going unmet. He cited the example of ADSL providers providing telephone services over ADSL, the reliability of which means it cannot be a replacement for a standard telephone in an emergency situation. He noted that ?Responsibility? is another axis that conflicts with the money-making axis - there is a need to ensure people can?t be sold something dangerous to them. Olaf Kolkman suggested that ?Public benefit? is a plane that cuts through this multi-plane structure in Patrik?s presentation. He also noted that in the non-Internet space, much experience has already been gained in balancing law enforcement and freedom/openness. In terms of regulation, there is a need to make available technology that is of public benefit in the long-term, and this should contribute to decision-making. Jim Reid argued that ?Public benefit? can mean many things ? RIPE may differ with the Chinese Government on what is constitutes ?public benefit?. He also noted that there are additional dimensions added to the calculation by ?alliances? between those different positions, and cited the UK, where ISPs challenged a law to make ISPs enforce laws, a decision based on their own business case, rather than in the interests of ?freedom?. Patrik added that different definitions of ?lawful? around the world also pose a problem. Wout de Natris suggested that this discussion demonstrates that all stakeholders are still learning how to work together, but that this cooperation will be vital in ensuring that when there is a crisis, governments do not ?panic? in responding. Constanze Bürger emphasised the need for awareness, and suggested that governments have a responsibility to ensure that the freedom of the Internet is not abused, but that regulation may not be the best tool for this. Patrik Fältström noted the lack of harmonization of positions even within governments, and that often, within a government, there is one group talking about opennesss and another group talking about cybercrime issues, each coming to different conclusions for Internet policy. Maria Häll asked whether it is actually desirable to have a different legal framework for the online world. Edmund Juskevicius, of Industry Canada, noted that the Internet tends to work pretty well most of the time, and asked how has this sort of cooperation been done up to this point. Patrik noted that there has been work done in some areas from an EU regulatory perspective, but there has been a more general lack of focus, and this is now starting to change. Paul Rendek also noted the greater interest being taken by international organisations like the OECD, with whom the RIPE NCC is working as part of the Internet Technical Advisory Committee. Malcolm Hutty highlighted the importance of government participation in developing cooperative relationships, and noted that this has often been lacking. In terms of the larger question of liability, he noted that there are people who break laws, through content or activity, and people want that stopped, and that this situation raises certain questions: what is the mechanism for doing this? If it is through intermediaries, what are the checks? Can private sector intermediaries act as law enforcement agencies, that is call in evidence, witnesses etc.? While such a solution may look attractive to stakeholders dealing with a large number of complaints, it would mean a very different system of justice for the online world. It is government?s role to create these definitions and balance the needs of law enforcement agencies against citizens? rights. Malcolm suggested that at this point, governments are only hearing from the complainants, and they need to take a more balanced view on such issues. Niall O?Reilly emphasised that it is governments that must face this responsibility and that there must be some kind of evidence-based review. He noted that in terms of the Internet, it will be impossible to predict the results of new policies without some kind of evidence-based review and discussion. Aleksi Suhonen highlighted the case of Finland?s child porn filter and the unforeseen consequences of this policy, which can serve as a warning case. He also noted that many operators are multi-national and therefore need to navigate different, often competing legislations, which can be very difficult. Toomas Lepik noted that the Palestinian government would like to turn off some Autonomous Systems from the routing path. Constanze Bürger argued that it is necessary to discuss these issues, and that the Internet poses real challenges in terms of borders, self-regulation and democracy. She noted that laws are not the only solution, and that government needs to look to other sectors for solutions as well. C. Update on European Union Activities: Data Retention Directive ? Patrik Fältström Jochem de Ruig of the RIPE NCC asked about law enforcement and data retention, and noted that law enforcement agencies (LEAs) have concerns regarding IPv6 and the logs that ISPs keep regarding assignments and allocations. Patrik noted that the first issue knowing which ISP is using which IP address, which comes back to the quality of the RIPE Database. He pointed out that some parties have argued we need something other than RIR databases, and for this reason he is wary of making changes to policy that will affect data quality in the RIR databases. If you find the ISP, the issue is then what is the responsibility of the ISP? At the moment, most existing regulation says that the ISP must know who had which IP address at a given time. It was noted that there are often different rules for IP, cell and fixed-line telephony, and this is problematic. Maria Häll and Patrik Fältström noted that Sweden has made a proposal (not implemented) that is technology neutral, but this is not reflected in the Directive. Patrik believes, though, that the people working on this in the Commission would like the revised Directive to be technology neutral. European Critical Infrastructure Directive ? Kurt Erik Lindqvist, Chris Buckridge Kurt Erik (Kurtis) Lindqvist and Chris Buckridge presented a brief summary of the discussions currently going on around the revision of the European Critical Infrastructure Directive, and the possibility that it will be expanded to cover the ICT sector. Leo Vegoda asked if the Directive intended to apply to organisations based in EU. Kurtis responded that it was his understanding that the Directive targets physical assets rather than organisations. Maria asked, given the closed nature of the EC discussions to date, whether there is a problem in terms of lack of information flowing between the different stakeholder groups. Kurtis acknowledged that an open discussion such as would happen at a RIPE Meeting would be preferable, but that it is a positive step that the Commission has reached out and invited a wide range of industry and technical community representatives to contribute to the discussion. Kurtis also gave a brief account of the recent critical infrastructure discussions held in Hungary, and the joint EU-US work that is being done. Jaap Akkerhuis noted that while the Directive talks about cross-border issues, there is a feeling that national telco industries don't talk to each other and are isolated. He also noted that for most telcos, borders don't really exist apart from regulation. Kurtis noted that the point of the work in this area is that physical assets clearly affect more than one country. While the industry can route around many borders and obstacles, however, the cable infrastructure demonstrates that there are limits to this. He noted that the Directive talks about infrastructure that affects more than 2 member states D. Update on Council of Europe Activities ? Wolfgang Kleinwächter Chris Buckridge gave a quick update on the work being done by in the Council of Europe on a set of Principles for Internet Governance, particularly the conference held in April that brought together a wide range of stakeholders to discuss the issue. This work is ongoing. Maria Häll commended the important work being done by the Council of Europe. E. CSTD WG Update ? Nurani Nimpuno Nurani Nimpuno provided an overview of the work being done in the Working Group convened by the UN?s Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) to examine ways to improve the IGF. While initially composed only of government representatives, there was a concerted push for greater multistakeholder involvement, and Nurani was selected as one of the five technical community representatives. Nurani noted that the initial meeting turned out to not be very substantive, though it was clear that there are very diverging views on the issues. A second meeting in Geneva also failed to produce a report, and the WG?s report will now be written by the Chair. The technical community representatives have stated their objection to this outcome, as it places this back in the hands of Member States alone. Nurani noted that the technical and business communities have failed to some extent in reaching out to the civil society stakeholders, and that better coordination between these groups will be important moving forward. Maria Häll noted that this whole process is an attempt to make the multistakeholder model work on a global level. Constanze Bürger noted that it was difficult to convince some in government of the value of participating in the IGF, but noted that the regional and national IGFs can be very useful in this regard. Nurani agree on the need to more effectively demonstrate the value of the IGF to all stakeholders. F. ICANN GAC Update - Maria Häll Maria Häll gave an update on the activities of the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), noting that has grown to 109 members. The issue of new gTLDs has been the major area of activity for the GAC over recent months, and the GAC has been working with the Board and community to resolve a range of issues identified in a ?Scorecard?. Z. AOB Steve Nash noted that while there has clearly a lot of work going on in this area, the working group?s mailing list has been virtually silent, and it would be great to see more discussion on the list. Maria agreed, and noted the Working Group Co-Chairs will be working to improve this over the coming weeks and months. Wout de Natris pointed out that few government people were in attendance, and that the technical community members need to take these specific topics to their relevant government people and challenge them to take part. He also noted, in response to an earlier point from Malcolm Hutty, that the Internet poses one significant difference for law enforcement to their usual work: when you track someone down on the Internet, you may have to go to addresses where the actual perpetrator isn?t there, only a hosting provider with a command-and-control centre for that network. This has major implications for obtaining evidence, and establishing a framework for how this works is a role for government and law enforcement. Jim Reid noted that it is clear that government representatives are not taking part in RIPE Meetings in great numbers, and it might be necessary to change tack. He suggested that it might be useful for more community members to take part in the RIPE NCC Roundtable Meetings. Paul Rendek thanked Jim for the suggestion. He noted that while the Roundtable Meetings are deliberately closed, to facilitate government participation, it may be useful to invite more community members to contribute, and the RIPE NCC will look into this option. Maria Häll closed the meeting. Best, Patrik and Maria För miljöns skull ? skriv inte ut detta meddelande i onödan

1 0