- cooperation-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Last call and final reminder for nominations to the 2022 Rob Blokzijl Award
by Carsten Schiefner 14 Mar '22

14 Mar '22

[Apologies for cross-posting to various RIPE lists] Dear Cooperation WG members - this is the last call and final reminder for nominations to the 2022 Rob Blokzijl Award that will be accepted until this Friday, 18th March, at 23:59 UTC. In seeking nominations for this prestigious award, which was created to celebrate Rob's contributions to the development of the Internet, the Award Committee (https://rob-blokzijl-foundation.org/2021/11/22/2022-award-committee/) is interested to receive nominations of those who have reflected Rob's approach in either a technical or operational capacity. Please give some consideration to nominating individuals - but also teams and groups of people! - in your own community and/or the wider industry in the RIPE region who, in your opinion, deserve to be recognised for their work to make the internet and/or internet community better. To specifically have this emphasised again after some according queries: nominations of teams and groups of people are very well possible and wished for as well in case their collective work would match the criteria of the call as laid out! The Award Committee is particularly interested to receive nominations of contributors who, in addition to their own contributions, have also supported and enabled others anywhere in the world. Also, the Award Committee would like to encourage those making nominations to consider not only the community members in the later stages of their careers or who are widely known but also those who may have contributed greatly in the springtime of their career or discreetly for the greater good or who may be considered to be part of an unrepresented group. And last but not least: those of you who previously have made a nomination other than Wilfried Woeber, the 2018 awardee, may want to consider resubmitting a nomination. The complete details of the call and the nomination process can be found at: https://rob-blokzijl-foundation.org/2021/11/25/call-for-nominations-2022/ Best wishes and kind regards Carsten (on behalf of the Award Committee)

1 0

Keep the Internet Open
by Johan Helsingius 11 Mar '22

11 Mar '22

Two interesting initiatives around the impact of Ukraine-related sanctions on the internet infrastructure. First this from Niels ten Oever: We made a statement on what we think an internet infrastructure governance sanctions regime should look like. Looking forward to discuss. Full document can be found here: https://pch.net/resources/Papers/Multistakeholder-Imposition-of-Internet-Sa… [PDF] Then this one from Daniel Karrenberg: -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [ripe-list] Appeal of the European Network Engineers Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 22:18:45 +0100 From: Daniel Karrenberg via ripe-list <ripe-list(a)ripe.net> Reply-To: Daniel Karrenberg <dfk(a)karrenberg.net> To: RIPE Mailing List <ripe-list(a)ripe.net> Keep the Internet Open ====================== Appeal of the European Network Engineers ---------------------------------------- We have worked hard to keep the Internet available in Europe and surrounding areas during the Covid pandemic. The Internet infrastructure is essential for the safety, security and well-being of all people living here. Due to the growing international tensions in this part of the world we hear calls to deliberately harm interconnections and the functioning of the network. We realise that the Internet is being used for purposes that many of us deplore. However this cannot be a reason to harm the infrastructure itself and prevent the good and often essential things that depend on it. We urge everyone to consider this carefully and not only refrain from harming the operation and interconnection but to actively work to keep the Internet running and maintain interconnections with all parts of our region. In particular we call on all governments and everyone involved with the governance of the Internet to do everything they can to enable us to keep the Internet infrastructure operational throughout the RIPE region. We will do our part as well as we can. <Signatures> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The purpose of this appeal is to influence everyone considering actions that would make it harder for us to keep the Internet running. In particular it is intended to provide guidance and support to Internet governance bodies like the RIPE NCC. It will only work if many individuals sign up to it publicly. Individuals considered close to the current conflicts will have special weight here! You can sign this appeal by mailing a signature line of the form Name, Place, Countrycode to <sign(a)keepitopen.net>. Please add a very short statement why you consider yourself a network engineer. Choose the place that best describes who you are; you do not have to be there right now. We will only publish the signature line and nothing else. We will delete your e-mail messages as soon as they are processed. Signatures will start to be published when we have collected at least 256 originating from throughout the region. We will start publicising this appeal once we have at least 1024 signatures. [Please spread the word.](https://keepitopen.net) Thank you for your support! Daniel Karrenberg, Roermond, NL -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

4 4

Recent developments
by Desiree Miloshevic 09 Mar '22

09 Mar '22

Dear members Further to all the news and media that we’re must be reading these days, the RIPE Lab article by the RIPE Chair might be of interest, especially the last paragraph on Ukraine. https://labs.ripe.net/author/mirjam_kuhne/the-ripe-chair-team-reports-febru… <https://labs.ripe.net/author/mirjam_kuhne/the-ripe-chair-team-reports-febru…> Likewise, the following EU regulation might be of interest too, on blocking “RT” media. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3A2022%3A065%3AT… <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ:L:2022:065:TOC&uri=u…> Desiree, Julf and Achilleas — Coop WG Co-Chiars

1 0

cross-posting RIPE NCC Exec board resolution on provision of critical services
by Desiree Miloshevic 02 Mar '22

02 Mar '22

Dear members Some of you might have seen the resolution below on the ripe-list yesterday. However, we're cross posting it here too, in case you have not seen it yet. https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-list/2022-March/002462.html Regards Desiree, Julf and Achilleas --

1 0

Open Technology Fund (OTF) fellowship and funds
by Corinne Cath 28 Feb '22

28 Feb '22

Dear all, I trust this email finds you well. I am a long-time lurker and occasional participant in the cooperation wg. I wanted to reach out in my new role as the Vice President of Research for the Open Technology Fund (OTF) <http://www.opentech.fund/>. We are an independent non-profit organization dedicated to advancing internet freedom in the world’s most repressive environments. I am reaching out to highlight our Internet Controls Fellowship Program (ICFP) <https://www.opentech.fund/funds/icfp/#:~:text=The%20Information%20Controls%…> which might be of interest to your networks. OTF funds the applied research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored internet access to enable citizens worldwide to exercise their fundamental human rights online. The ICFP fellowship program supports individuals doing research to examine restrictions on the free flow of information by repressive governments. In particular, ICFP fellows track Internet interference practices and investigate emerging means of overcoming censorship in repressive environments - the countries, regions, or areas worldwide where Internet freedom is most threatened. (see fellowship call below, deadline for application is March 13th). I would really appreciate it if you would be able to share it with the community. Kind regards, -- Dr. Corinne Cath Vice President of Research Open Technology Fund | w: opentech.fund | t: @OpenTechFund Signal: +1 202 209 6820 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Open Technology Fund Information Controls Fellowship Program (ICFP) Call The Open Technology Fund (OTF) <http://www.opentech.fund/> is an independent non-profit organization dedicated to advancing internet freedom in the world’s most repressive environments. OTF supports the applied research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored internet access to enable citizens worldwide to exercise their fundamental human rights online. OTF’s Information Controls Fellowship Program (ICFP) is open for applications for its ninth fellowship cohort, with a final deadline of March 13, 2022. The application and additional information can be found here <https://www.opentech.fund/funds/icfp/>. About the Program The ICFP fellowship program supports individuals doing research to examine restrictions on the free flow of information by repressive governments. In particular, ICFP fellows track Internet interference practices and investigate emerging means of overcoming censorship in repressive environments - the countries, regions, or areas worldwide where Internet freedom is most threatened. Efforts that focus on investigating the security and privacy of tools used in these contexts are also supported. The ICFP program offers flexibility for candidates with fellowships available for three, six, nine, or twelve months in duration. This allows for the support of a wider range of proposed efforts, from those that are relatively short-term to projects that are larger in scope. The fellowship offers a monthly stipend of $5,000 along with stipends for travel and equipment. Independent Study with Organizational Support All ICFP fellows are based with a host organization, these can also be academic departments, for the duration of their fellowship term. Host organizations should demonstrate the ability to assist the applicant in carrying out the proposed scope of work. Applicants can propose any host organization on their application as long as sufficient justification for the selection is provided. For example, if you’re proposing to work on a project studying how misinformation spreads online, then your proposed host organization should be equipped to provide expert guidance on this topic. OTF welcomes host organizations from non-academic organizations as well as those that are based outside of the United States. Or vice versa, if you are affiliated with an organization and want to host an ICFP fellow at your organization, please email icfphost(a)opentech.fund for more information. Supported Topical Areas of Study Past fellows have explored a range of topics and technological focuses, including country and region-specific information controls studies; the development of research-focused software tools used to investigate Internet censorship as well as those that can circumvent online censorship; studies around targeted digital attacks aimed at at-risk users; and research into security vulnerabilities in technologies used by at-risk communities. To get a better sense of the types of efforts supported through the ICFP program, you can read about the current (eighth) cohort of fellows here <https://www.opentech.fund/news/announcing-otfs-newest-8th-class-of-informat…>, and past classes here (rounds one <https://www.opentech.fund/news/information-controls-fellowship-first-round-…> , two <https://www.opentech.fund/news/icfp-second-round-wrap-up-results-and-outcom…> , three <https://www.opentech.fund/news/icfp-third-round-wrap-up-results-and-outcome…> , four <https://www.opentech.fund/news/fourth-cohort-information-controls-fellows-r…> , five <https://www.opentech.fund/news/2018-ICFP-wrap-up/>, six <https://www.opentech.fund/news/announcing-otfs-newest-class-of-information-…>, and seven <https://www.opentech.fund/news/announcing-otfs-latest-class-of-information-…> ). Questions? If you have any questions, please post them in this public spreadsheet <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RNxswHBoOxWEqq4Yo_ozaqOUziN3BI4pr8L…> and they will be answered in a prompt fashion. If your question is not appropriate for a public forum, please email icfp(a)opentech.fund. If the fellowship is not a good fit for you, please check out the additional avenues for funding that OTF offers through our other funds, including the Internet Freedom Fund (IFF). <https://www.opentech.fund/funds/internet-freedom-fund/> -- Dr. Corinne Cath Vice President of Research Open Technology Fund | w: opentech.fund | t: @OpenTechFund Signal: +1 202 209 6820

1 0

IGF Open Consultation meeting starts today
by Chris Buckridge 23 Feb '22

23 Feb '22

Dear working group, Just a reminder that today is the first IGF Open Consultation of the year (to be followed by two half-days of MAG meetings). The meetings are fully virtual, open to all, and kick off in just under an hour. You can register to gain access at the following link, as well as find details of the agenda: https://intgovforum.org/en/content/igf-2022-first-open-consultations-and-ma… Hope to see some RIPE community members in the discussion, and I’ll provide some reporting and updates to this list next week. Best regards, Chris

1 0

Big telcos and net neutrality
by Johan Helsingius 18 Feb '22

18 Feb '22

I am sure many of you have seen this. https://www.internetnews.me/2022/02/14/big-telcos-want-to-break-net-neutral… My first reaction was to laugh at the irony, but then I remembered that those guys still have a huge lobbying power. Is this something we want to discuss and address in the group (webinar, communique, whatever)? Julf

2 1

DNS4EU - proposal for a community response - draft
by Desiree Miloshevic 10 Feb '22

10 Feb '22

Dear members, dear all Further to the RIPE NCC’s summary of the DNS4EU Open House discussion and further to your witnessing of our earlier 'transparent wordsmithing consultation' with other RIPE - WG Chairs, I’d like to propose the following high level statement draft for your consideration. Julf and myself, as Co-Chairs are in agreement with this draft statement and Achilleas had excused himself due to his affiliation with the EC. We’d like to know if there is some support from members for having a RIPE community response on this proposal? We would really appreciate your feedback or any comments you’d wish to make or if you'd like us to work further on this. Many thanks for your consideration and the feedback, Desiree -- Coop WG Co-Chair Proposed DNS4EU RIPE community statement comments 1. RIPE community believes that governance of the DNS resolution chain, which is such an important element of everybody's Internet connectivity, should involve all stakeholders and can not solely rely on legislation and regulatory oversight. 1. RIPE Community hopes that any winning bidder will adhere to what we see as a fundamental property of the Internet, with a diverse and competitive landscape, anchored on the principles of multistakeholder Internet governance. 2. RIPE Community believes that the responsibility of well-functioning Internet access including the DNS resolution is with the access providers. We believe it should stay that way. 3. We understand that to be able to minimise some risks when the end user selects a random DNS resolver, a possible and feasible solution is to have the access provider run their local DNS resolvers and/or an additional DNS resolver as a back-up. 4. We hope that the EU could allocate DNS4EU funds to the local Internet community and encourage Internet access providers to run their local DNS resolvers. Additionally, the funds can be also used towards the development of open source software for better and affordable DNS resolution services. On 2 Feb 2022, at 15:26, Chris Buckridge <chrisb(a)ripe.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, Thank you to all who joined for the RIPE NCC Open House discussion of DNS4EU on Monday, 31 January. We have posted a summary of some key points and links to the video archive here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/ Cheers Chris -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https: <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg>

6 6

Fwd: DNS4EU - community response draft
by Desiree Miloshevic 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

Dear all Further to the RIPE NCC’s summary of the DNS4EU Open House discussion posted bellow, and further to your witnessing of our our earlier transparent wordsmithing consultation with other Chairs ;), I’d like to propose the following high level statement draft for your consideration. Julf and myself, as Co-Chairs are in agreement and Achilleas had excused himself due to his role at the EC. We’d like to know if there is some support from members for having a RIPE community response on this proposal? We would really appreciate your feedback or any comments you’d wish to make. Lastly we'd appreciate if the DNS WG Co-chairs would consider sharing this draft with their members too, since most of the DNS4EU discussion is taking place on that list. Many thanks for your consideration and the feedback, Desiree -- Coop WG Co-Chair Proposed DNS4EU RIPE community statement RIPE community believes that governance of the DNS resolution chain, which is such an important element of everybody's Internet connectivity, should involve all stakeholders and can not solely rely on legislation and regulatory oversight. RIPE Community hopes that any winning bidder will adhere to what we see as a fundamental property of the Internet, with a diverse and competitive landscape, anchored on the principles of multistakeholder Internet governance. RIPE Community believes that the responsibility of well-functioning Internet access including the DNS resolution is with the access providers. We believe it should stay that way. We understand that to be able to minimise some risks when the end user selects a random DNS resolver, a possible and feasible solution is to have the access provider run their local DNS resolvers and/or an additional DNS resolver as a back-up. We hope that the EU could allocate DNS4EU funds to the local Internet community and encourage Internet access providers to run their local DNS resolvers. Additionally, the funds can be also used towards the development of open source software for better and affordable DNS resolution services. On 2 Feb 2022, at 15:26, Chris Buckridge <chrisb(a)ripe.net <mailto:chrisb@ripe.net>> wrote: Dear colleagues, Thank you to all who joined for the RIPE NCC Open House discussion of DNS4EU on Monday, 31 January. We have posted a summary of some key points and links to the video archive here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/ <https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/> Cheers Chris -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg>

1 0

Heads up on DNS4EU - idea for community high level comment.
by Desiree Miloshevic 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

Hi everyone I’ve made a draft, in agreement with Julf, on behalf of the Coop WG, (Achilleas excused because of his role). We’d like to share this with you before it goes out to the Coop WG members, and to involve DNS WG, since the DNS4EU discussion was mainly housed at the DNS WG. The idea is to ask members if they’d be happy for us to go out with a high level statement on this. If they say yes, we go ahead and wordsmith it. If they shoot it down, we do not do it. Looking fwd to your comments and if you like it how we would involve both or all community WGs. Tx! Desiree — DNS4EU High Level Statement 1. Any solution for DNS resolvers should adhere to the Multistakeholder governance principles and respect the principles of distributed and modular nature of the DNS. (Saying that mandated use of centralised DNS resolvers is not a good principle and should not be only based on legislation). It is questionable if the proposed solution would solve the problem described. 2. The responsibility of well-functioning Internet access including the DNS resolution is with the access providers. We believe it should stay that way. 3. We understand that to be able to minimise some risks when the end user selects a random DNS resolver, a possible and feasible solution is to have the access provider run their local DNS resolvers and/or an additional DNS resolver as a back-up. 4. The EU could allocate DNS4EU funds to the local Internet community and encourage Internet access providers to run their local DNS resolvers. Additionally, the funds can be also used towards the development of open source software for better and affordable DNS resolution services.

2 1