RIPE Hostmasters visiting LIRs
Hello, Recently a few colleagues and I have been talking about the way we interact with the people in the RIPE NCC when dealing with customer assignments (and some other matters). One of the things we thought could be beneficial is if Hostmasters had more experience of the kind of issues we in the ISP community face on a day-to-day basis. We thought it might be a good idea if some of the Hostmasters were able to visit an ISP and see how they work, meet the people they deal with and perhaps work alongside them for a period of time. With this in mind we first thought of inviting individual people to come and visit us, or perhaps addressing the NCC asking if this were possible. However, we soon realised that this would have neutrality implications, and that it could be damaging both to the RIPE NCC reputation and to ours, and that for this reason it was unlikely to be accepted by them. In the last week or so I've been in touch with people in several other LIRs here in the Netherlands on an informal basis, and we all seem to agree that, were visits made to multiple registries by multiple members of the staff of the NCC, then this would have fewer neutrality implications. It seems like there are several registries who would be happy to offer help with this if it has a potential benefit for all LIRs. I realise that this has been discussed in various forums before, but feel personally that we are now able to remove many of the barriers which might prevent it happening. Do other LIRs feel that this could be beneficial to everyone in the RIPE community? What do RIPE NCC staff themselves think about it? What kind of restraints do people feel should be placed upon any such scheme? How should it be organised? Should it be discussed at a meeting? Looking forward to any comments on the lir-wg mailing-list, Best wishes, Sam
Hi, On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 05:00:41PM +0200, Sam Critchley wrote:
Do other LIRs feel that this could be beneficial to everyone in the RIPE community? What do RIPE NCC staff themselves think about it? What kind of restraints do people feel should be placed upon any such scheme? How should it be organised? Should it be discussed at a meeting?
I think it's a very good idea. Sometimes it is very frustrating to try to explain to RIPE hostmasters why something should be done in a certain way (because business demands it), and I imagine that it could be very helpful for them to see the "daily problems" of an ISP with their own eyes. Let's discuss it at the LIR-WG. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- SpaceNet GmbH Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299
Sam Critchley wrote:
Do other LIRs feel that this could be beneficial to everyone in the RIPE community? What do RIPE NCC staff themselves think about it? What kind of restraints do people feel should be placed upon any such scheme? How should it be organised? Should it be discussed at a meeting?
Looking forward to any comments on the lir-wg mailing-list,
I think this is a extremly good idea. At the moment there has come a wast number of new LIR:s within the RIPE area. This suggestion should include both old LIR:s as the new one. It would benefit the way we work within the membership and build up a better understanding how everyone work as a LIR and as company/organization wich goal is to satisfy it's customers in the best possible way. I suggest that this should be a point on a upcoming meeting.
From there we should be able to create the way this should be done.
Regards /Amar Andersson Telia Net
* Amar (amar@telia.net) [990916 17:19]:
Sam Critchley wrote:
Do other LIRs feel that this could be beneficial to everyone in the RIPE community? What do RIPE NCC staff themselves think about it? What kind of restraints do people feel should be placed upon any such scheme? How should it be organised? Should it be discussed at a meeting?
Looking forward to any comments on the lir-wg mailing-list,
I think this is a extremly good idea. At the moment there has come a wast number of new LIR:s within the RIPE area. This suggestion should include both old LIR:s as the new one. It would benefit the way we work within the membership and build up a better understanding how everyone work as a LIR and as company/organization wich goal is to satisfy it's customers in the best possible way.
I suggest that this should be a point on a upcoming meeting.
From there we should be able to create the way this should be done.
Hi Sam! Hi Amar! Hi all! i also find it a good idea that Hostmasters shall visiting LIRs. It helps both sides, as the hostmasters see the lir view and problems and also the lir's can learn from the ripe. what should be covered are the costs ? 50 / 50 for lir / ripe or what else. i mean for bigger lirs it shall be no problem, but the smaller ones may not have enough money to pay the hotel or travel costs for the hostmaster. Jan
Jan Ahrent Czmok wrote:
what should be covered are the costs ? 50 / 50 for lir / ripe or what else.
You bring up an issue that we have to solve. And that is the finance of this. I think that most of the interested bigger LIR:s would be able to finance this on a, let's say, 50/50 basis.
i mean for bigger lirs it shall be no problem, but the smaller ones may not have enough money to pay the hotel or travel costs for the hostmaster.
It is up to all the LIR:s that are interested to have a visit from a hostmaster to take an active roll in this suggestion. Noone should be forced ;-) But speaking for an ISP, i should evaluate the cost and see what i should gain from a visit. And i know it should be worth it. There is so many issues you would like to discuss with the RIPE staff, eye to eye. The meetings are a good forum, but sometimes you would like to show how that actual sitiuation is within your country or area. (One thing. This should not be a way for an big ISP to get a chance to do "lobbying" on his own turf. I am not afraid of this. But i would only like to state my opinion of this.) But those LIR:s that feel that they can not affford this is the main factor. I do not know how hard it should strain RIPE:s budget if we should do this: Eg: Size LIR/RIPE --------------------------------------------------- Large : 50/50 % Medium : 35/65 % Small : 20/80 % ( These numbers i just a suggestion ) The big LIR:s would "support" the smaller ones. But i am willing to do this as long that i can see that this will benefit the community as a whole. How much expences would RIPE:s finances be able to take without rising the memberfee for the LIR:s? If this would be a result of this, then i am sorry to say, would not get a consensus on a meeting. Regards /Amar Telia Net
* Amar (amar@telia.net) [990916 17:58]:
Jan Ahrent Czmok wrote:
what should be covered are the costs ? 50 / 50 for lir / ripe or what else.
You bring up an issue that we have to solve. And that is the finance of this. I think that most of the interested bigger LIR:s would be able to finance this on a, let's say, 50/50 basis.
I agree completely.
(One thing. This should not be a way for an big ISP to get a chance to do "lobbying" on his own turf. I am not afraid of this. But i would only like to state my opinion of this.)
I think the hostmasters from ripe are very -straight- and i never see any lobbying..
But those LIR:s that feel that they can not affford this is the main factor. I do not know how hard it should strain RIPE:s budget if we should do this:
Eg:
Size LIR/RIPE --------------------------------------------------- Large : 50/50 % Medium : 35/65 % Small : 20/80 %
I also have this idea in mind, but on the large and super national i would say 80/20 and medium 50/50 might be a better idea, as the most are in medium range and the bigger ones (such as we) shall support also the smaller ones.
( These numbers i just a suggestion )
My numbers also..
The big LIR:s would "support" the smaller ones. But i am willing to do this as long that i can see that this will benefit the community as a whole.
Right. I think it could help the community as a whole and to fasten up many problems currently arising (e.g. long waiting queues)
How much expences would RIPE:s finances be able to take without rising the memberfee for the LIR:s?
If this would be a result of this, then i am sorry to say, would not get a consensus on a meeting.
Regards
/Amar
Telia Net
Jan
In message <37E113A2.D37D190C@telia.net>, Amar writes:
It is up to all the LIR:s that are interested to have a visit from a hostmaster to take an active roll in this suggestion.
I actually disagree. It is rather obvious from the various consistency reports that some LIR's are more in need of a visit than others... -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!
Poul-Henning Kamp skrev:
In message <37E113A2.D37D190C@telia.net>, Amar writes:
I actually disagree. It is rather obvious from the various consistency reports that some LIR's are more in need of a visit than others...
The numbers suggested have the pontential to create a sitiuation where the hostmasters would be able to visit those LIR:s that have a problem with consistency. But you bring up a point here. We have to ask us what the actual outcome of a visit should be: - Is it a visit from RIPE to solve the consistency? or - Is it a way to make the members and RIPE work more closely togheter, and by that bring up a better understanding between the LIR:s and RIPE? And by that also be able to solve the problems that maybe have led to the sitiuation where we today have consistency as a result? I see it as a way to get in contact with the "hard-to-reach" LIR:s that actually do a lot of registrations today. But they can of some reason not be able/afford to attend a RIPE meeting. Both of the actual cost and the loss of workpower as a person attending a meeting would result in. Regards /Amar Telia Net
In message <37E11CDE.62530B5B@telia.net>, Amar writes:
Poul-Henning Kamp skrev:
In message <37E113A2.D37D190C@telia.net>, Amar writes:
I actually disagree. It is rather obvious from the various consistency reports that some LIR's are more in need of a visit than others...
The numbers suggested have the pontential to create a sitiuation where the hostmasters would be able to visit those LIR:s that have a problem with consistency.
But you bring up a point here.
Well, my point was not quite one of those you present, it was more along the lines: Wouldn't it be a more profitable use of RIPEs funds to visit the provably needy LIRs ? even at a 50/50 funding split, this is going to drain a lot of resources from RIPE, so we might as well try to get some tangible benefits from it. Of course we could also try to add a new policy which says that if a LIR after three warnings from RIPE havn't gotten their act together they get a RIPE visit, and the full bill for that visit (the "RIPE-MIB": RIPE-Men In Black :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Well, my point was not quite one of those you present, it was more along the lines:
Wouldn't it be a more profitable use of RIPEs funds to visit the provably needy LIRs ?
If this is a way to help "needy" LIRs in the best way i am note sure about. But it could be a part of a bigger activity from RIPE. But there will allways be some LIRs that doesn't want to finance this type of activities with LIRs that need help from RIPE. I this suggestion from RIPE more a way from RIPE to get to know the LIRs and the sitiuation that they actually face every day. I am sure that there is some LIRs that need help, but i am not sure if this is the right way to solve this problem.
even at a 50/50 funding split, this is going to drain a lot of resources from RIPE, so we might as well try to get some tangible benefits from it.
True. Thats why we need some figures of how the present finance of RIPE will be able to handle the costs. This input can only be give by RIPE itself.
Of course we could also try to add a new policy which says that if a LIR after three warnings from RIPE havn't gotten their act together they get a RIPE visit, and the full bill for that visit (the "RIPE-MIB": RIPE-Men In Black :-)
1984 ;-) I do not think that RIPE need to do this. And it is allready stated in some sentence in RIPE-170 section 4.4. /Amar
I think this is a extremly good idea.
I second that - it is an excellent idea! Sincerely, \'"'/ Barak Engel ( o o ) Netvision ---------------------ooOO-^-oOOo--------------------------- barak@netvision.net.il Network Expert BE-RIPE BE174 Phone/Fax: +972 48 560600#666/551132 Cell: +972 50 469 341 -----------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 17:00:41 +0200 (MET DST), in <Pine.GSO.4.10.9909161147130.25878-100000@jmnoc75.ams.ops.eu.uu.net>, samc@UU.NET (Sam Critchley) wrote:
Recently a few colleagues and I have been talking about the way we interact with the people in the RIPE NCC when dealing with customer assignments (and some other matters). One of the things we thought could be beneficial is if Hostmasters had more experience of the kind of issues we in the ISP community face on a day-to-day basis.
[...]
Do other LIRs feel that this could be beneficial to everyone in the RIPE community? What do RIPE NCC staff themselves think about it? What kind of restraints do people feel should be placed upon any such scheme? How should it be organised? Should it be discussed at a meeting?
I feel this could only benefit LIRs and RIPE NCC. It would be nice to see local visits on a fairly regular basis so we all get to know the work the other half is doing. Regards, -- leo vegoda level (3) communications, london, uk PGP Key ID: 0xCC00E1AA PGP Fingerprint: 8B72 E9C8 AA9D D615 EE6E EA45 370C 0801 CC00 E1AA
participants (7)
-
Amar -
Barak Engel -
Gert Doering, Netmaster -
Jan Ahrent Czmok -
leo.vegoda＠level3.com -
Poul-Henning Kamp -
Sam Critchley