This is a summary of activities undertaken by RIPE NCC on the formation of an Address Supporting Organisation to affiliate to ICANN since the 32nd RIPE meeting in Amsterdam. At that meeting, we heard from Esther Dyson, interim chairman of ICANN, on the need for an ASO to develop policy in the area of Internet addresses. She, in turn, got to meet us and to see the open forum that is RIPE in action, discussing and forming Internet policy in Europe. She expressed the view that RIPE made sense and the hope that RIPE would become involved in ICANN and in the formation of the ASO. In plenary, RIPE 32 clearly said that it wanted to maintain a bottom-up structure in Internet governance, with working and representative regional structures forming the basis of bodies such as the ASO. Least of all did they want a situation whereby ISPs would be obliged to argue their views on address policy in both European and global forums. Mandated by these clear expressions of policy, RIPE NCC undertook to engage in fresh discussions with the other RIRs, APNIC and ARIN. The NCC arranged a teleconference involving exec and board members of all three RIRs. This established a good deal of common round, including the importance of transparent and open process, and of representative structures. The RIRs and their communities were the most directly concerned with address policy and as such should have a key role in the ASO. The views of other groups were also important, and three possible sectors were identified here: government (representing the general public interest), engineering (with an overview of what was technically feasible), and industry (in the widest sense of the Internet). It was agreed to continue this discussion at the APNIC meeting in Singapore at the end of February, again with exec and board members of the three RIRs. There, the process was further opened, with EuroISPA and CIX being invited to attend. These two bodies had made a joint ASO proposal to ICANN, although they had neither advised nor consulted any of the RIRs about this. While anyone is of course at liberty to make a proposal to ICANN, RIPE NCC believes that this should be done in conformance with the open and transparent ethos of ICANN. Indeed, we believe that the RIPE NCC association can speak for you in matters of address policy; we have an obligation to do so on your behalf in external forums, provided we continue to listen to your views and to give effect to them in a clear and impartial manner. At the same time, we recognise that RIPE NCC does not represent ISPs in all aspects of their business, and that there are areas of concern which might best be addressed by trade associations such as EuroISPA. However, when it comes to address policy, you, through RIPE, are the people who have formed the working policies in Europe in the past decade, and RIPE NCC is your association which has helped to implement those policies, openly and impartially, on our behalf, and to represent those policies to other RIRs and to IANA. At the meeting in Singapore, the consensus was that time should be taken to produce a set of solid ASO principles and a charter, rather then being driven by looming deadlines. We are determined to pursue a course of action which will do justice to the collective opinion of members of the RIPE NCC association, and to the work which you have done in shaping and self-regulating the Internet in Europe. We welcome your views on these matters and look forward to representing them in the formation of the ASO. We encourage RIPE participants and RIPE NCC members to follow and participate in the formation process of the ICANN ASO - more information can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/info/ncc/regional.html and http://www.icann.org Keith Mitchell Chairman, on behalf of the RIPE NCC Executive Board