Dear Mirjam, dear Daniel, Robert, Andrey, dear Mr. Postel, On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
Dear local registries,
The following document written by Robert Blokzijl, Daniel Karrenberg and Alexei Platonov was announced to the RIPE community and to all local registries after the last RIPE Meeting:
ripe-167: A Regional Internet Registry for the Commonwealth of Independent States
[...]
If you then have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or one of the authors.
Being a person who actually operate one of the major LIRs in Ukraine, UA.GU, with almost 5 years of experience of administering IP networks, I'd like to comment on both the approach of ripe-167 and on some actual statements of it. I'd also like to provide some proposals about how to improve the state of affairs at least for Ukraine. I'm Cc:-ing this message to all interested parties, in a hope that a broader discussion will start then. ripe-167 was also discussed by the Ukrainian First National Conference "Internet technologies in National Information Infrastrure", in Yalta, November 3-6, organized under supervision of Ukrainian Ministry of Information and National Agency for Informatization. This is why there wasn't an earlier reply -- now my comments are accomodating the results of the discussion.
Kind Regards,
Mirjam Kuehne Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
Let's examine the document below. -------------------------- ripe-167.txt -------------------------------- # # A Regional Internet Registry for the Commonwealth of Independent States # # Robert Blokzijl # Daniel Karrenberg # Alexei Platonov # 2 October 1997 # # Table of Contents # # 1.Scope # 2.Background # 3.Local Service Arrangement # 4.New Regional Registry # 5.Next Steps # 6.Addresses of the Authors # ______________________________________________________________ # # 1.Scope # # This memorandum is intended to focus discussion about the # establishment of a Regional Internet Registry serving the CIS and # surrounding areas. Public comments are invited. The ultimate aim of # this process is to achieve rough consensus about the issue within # the region concerned. This memo represents the views of the # individual authors only. It has not been endorsed by any # organisation. # # 2.Background # # Since the start of the RIPE NCC as a regional Internet registry in # April 1991 Russia and the other countries of the CIS (former USSR) # have been served by the RIPE NCC. Developments of the last few # years however suggest that it is difficult for the RIPE NCC to # serve all parts of this area because in practise there exist a # number of practical problems. These problems have to do with # circumstances caused by: # # - local language problems # This is not a problem. There is an axiom that at least for ISP there is at least one person onsite who has sufficient English skills to communicate with RIPE personnel. # - time zone differences # Assignment of IP address space and establishment of LIRs aren't a matter of minutes and even hours aren't always that critical. In any case, if the process will take some time, it's not that big a problem. # - travel difficulties # # - effort necessary to organise coordination meetings Mailing lists aren't that bad for coordination, anyway. # If has been suggested more than once that the countries of the CIS # in fact form a separate region from Europe that needed special # regional support. This thesis isn't historically or politically correct. First of all, CIS isn't something solid or clearly defined, xUSSR is a much better definition. Some countries of xUSSR belong to Eastern Europe, culturally and historically. Others are much closer to Middle East. And anyway, this is a set of _different_ countries, often they are much more isolated one from another than any given pair of Western European countries. Reality is: there isn't such clear "region" as CIS. # Because of these difficulties the RIPE NCC has cooperated with the # Russian Institute of Public Networks, RosNIIROS. RosNIIROS is also # known by its english acronym: RIPN. RosNIIROS have acted since # 1992, in close cooperation with RIPE NCC, as a Local IR of last # resort. They also support the Local IR activities of a significant # number of ISPs in the region. # # 3.Local Service Arrangement # # As everywhere else in the world, also Russia and the CIS have seen # a rapid growth in Internet activities, including a growth in the # number of ISPs. Currently about 100 ISPs are active in the region, # of which around 60 are located in Russia. If the above statement was supplied by some statistics and numbers, the picture might be much more clear. As for me, I consider the total of 100 is somewhat underestimated. # The current growth is # about 3 new ISPs per month. Most of the new ISPs are located in the # Urals region and further east in Siberia. Note: Urals and Siberia are parts of a single country -- Russia. # Because of this growth # and the difficulties described above, the RIPE NCC is exploring # ways to ensure optimal service for these registries. # # The RIPE NCC are currently considering to ask RosNIIROS to provide # full local support equivalent to that supplied by the Amsterdam # RIPE office to local registries in the region that wish to use it. # The NCC would remain fully responsible for operations including # service level and quality. The NCC would provide all necessary # resources to RosNIIROS. Local registries in the region would # continue to have a service agreement with the RIPE NCC but have the # option to receive service according to their preference from either # RosNIIROS or the RIPE NCC, but not both at the same time. We # envisage to start this arrangement sometime during the first # quarter of 1998. Of course all this will happen under the guidance # of the RIPE Local IR working group and IANA # # The subsequent period can then be used by RosNIIROS to gain # experience and increase the acceptance of their service. This time # will also be used to get a clearer idea of the exact extent of the # region served by the potential RIR. We expect this period to last # at least 12 months but not more than 24 months. # # 4.New Regional Registry # # We expect that the above arrangement will work well. Because of # that it will eventually be used by the majority of the Local IR s # in the region. Steps will then be taken to convert the local # service arrangement into its own Regional Internet Registry # separate from the RIPE NCC. A prerequisite for this is widespread # acceptance, appropriate governance mechanisms and a truly # international scope. # # This whole process needs active involvement of all ISP's in the # region in the governance of the Regional IR RosNIIROS will actively # pursue to gain the acceptance and help to put the appropriate # governance mechanisms in place. # # 5.Next Steps # # The authors invite a public discussion about this process # especially within the CIS region but also within RIPE in general. # RIPE NCC and RosNIIROS will take preparatory steps late this year. # If the discussion reveals no serious objections the local service # arrangement will start sometime during Q1/1998. What are the conclusion of reviewing this document? 1. The document is based on political and historical ideas from an epoque of 5 years ago. They aren't correct anymore. 2. The document doesn't provide a solid set of argumentation, neither in favor of "RR for xUSSR countries" creation itself, nor in favor of creation of this RR in Moscow. As one can't get enough information from the document itself, what might be at the background of it? a. RosNIIROS is a governmental institution, it isn't a collaborative organisation. It's activity reflects the policy of a single government -- Russian -- and this policy often directly contradicts the interests of other xUSSR countries. b. In the nearest past, Russian government started establishing a policy of strong governmental regulation for Internet activity on Russian territory. c. RosNIIROS isn't a single entity in Russia trying to achieve the major role in regulating and directing Internet activity. Naturally, they also might have an interest in broadening their role to the whole xUSSR, to get a bonus in this "competition". d. Holding an RR for a set of adjucent countries will allow Russian governmental institutions to monitor Internet activities there and even get some influence on them. e. Being an RR allows providing of the service involves getting some funds from the customers, in this case -- from ISPs. Probably, governmental funding of RosNIIROS isn't enough for them today, and additional funding is badly needed. These are my guesses and impressions, not clear facts. These are _questions_. But one can draw some conclusions even from questions. According to discussions with collegues and other interested parties, here and at Yalta conference, I'd like to finish my comments with the following conclusions: Most Ukrainian ISPs are voting against an attempt to establish an "RR for CIS"; what is CIS, anyway? By the way, Russia is a federation itself, so Russia alone is in fact a region. So creating of RR for Russia in RosNIIROS would be much more correct, and make it so. In case RIPE will create a RIPN-based "RR for CIS" it would be boycotted by most Ukrainian ISPs due to unclear political and financial reasons of it's creation. We prefer dealing with RIPE directly -- our contributions to RIPE are pretty sufficient for this. As for new and young LIRs in Ukraine -- they in fact do have personnel who know English. Also Kyiv is much closer to Europe than to Siberia. # 6.Addresses of the Authors # # Robert Blokzijl # RIPE Chairman # <k13@nikhef.nl> # # Daniel Karrenberg # RIPE NCC Manager # <dfk@ripe.net> # # Alexei Platonov # RosNIIROS (RIPN) Director # <plat@ripn.net> # --------------------------------------------------------------------- Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Hi, I think there is some misunderstanding, may be due to the fact that some details are not clearly defined in the ripe-167 document. The idea is _to start_ the process on the base of RosNIIROS, as far as it has done something already with this problem. If we agree with the idea of RIR, then the work is to be done within some "collaborative entity" and the model of RIPE is acceptable. If we need, some international association can be formally established. I've already discussed it with some of Russian ISPs, and they also think so. Of course, it's not acceptable that Russian Government will dictate something through RosNIIROS. The latter can play only _technical_ role (if it'll be decided that it is RosNIIROS that should do this work after initial period). I didn't quite understand, Ucrainian ISPs don't like the idea of RIR at all, or they don't like it to be based on some organization (say, with international status) located in Moscow ? What about Minsk, then ? :-) Best regards, Alexei Platonov RosNIIROS According to Andrew Stesin:
What are the conclusion of reviewing this document?
1. The document is based on political and historical ideas from an epoque of 5 years ago. They aren't correct anymore. 2. The document doesn't provide a solid set of argumentation, neither in favor of "RR for xUSSR countries" creation itself, nor in favor of creation of this RR in Moscow.
As one can't get enough information from the document itself, what might be at the background of it?
a. RosNIIROS is a governmental institution, it isn't a collaborative organisation. It's activity reflects the policy of a single government -- Russian -- and this policy often directly contradicts the interests of other xUSSR countries.
b. In the nearest past, Russian government started establishing a policy of strong governmental regulation for Internet activity on Russian territory.
c. RosNIIROS isn't a single entity in Russia trying to achieve the major role in regulating and directing Internet activity. Naturally, they also might have an interest in broadening their role to the whole xUSSR, to get a bonus in this "competition".
d. Holding an RR for a set of adjucent countries will allow Russian governmental institutions to monitor Internet activities there and even get some influence on them.
e. Being an RR allows providing of the service involves getting some funds from the customers, in this case -- from ISPs. Probably, governmental funding of RosNIIROS isn't enough for them today, and additional funding is badly needed.
These are my guesses and impressions, not clear facts. These are _questions_. But one can draw some conclusions even from questions.
According to discussions with collegues and other interested parties, here and at Yalta conference, I'd like to finish my comments with the following conclusions:
Most Ukrainian ISPs are voting against an attempt to establish an "RR for CIS"; what is CIS, anyway? By the way, Russia is a federation itself, so Russia alone is in fact a region. So creating of RR for Russia in RosNIIROS would be much more correct, and make it so.
In case RIPE will create a RIPN-based "RR for CIS" it would be boycotted by most Ukrainian ISPs due to unclear political and financial reasons of it's creation. We prefer dealing with RIPE directly -- our contributions to RIPE are pretty sufficient for this. As for new and young LIRs in Ukraine -- they in fact do have personnel who know English. Also Kyiv is much closer to Europe than to Siberia.
Gentlemen and Gentlewomen, it seems we're going to make a mess in the "exUSSR" Internet affairs as we made it with our political and economical ones. I do agree with some points in Mr. Stesin's message, and I do understand his wishes with regard to the proposed RIR for CIS (whatever it means). There are two registries in AM, and I "represent" both of them - at present, we are not interested in a RIR for CIS - we're pretty comfortable with the RIPE (Hello there :-). I would like to ask you to not transfer the discussion about LIRs to the political/ /national/etc levels, yours Edgar am.nic am.armentel
> it with our political and economical ones. I do agree with some points in > Mr. Stesin's message, and I do understand his wishes with regard to the > proposed RIR for CIS (whatever it means). There are two registries in AM, > and I "represent" both of them - at present, we are not interested in a RIR > for CIS - we're pretty comfortable with the RIPE (Hello there :-). I would Certainly, YOU are. But we - we are not happy to solve problems via Amsterdam. I do not meant _we can'not_ - but it's not good idea. Exactly - _we can_ - but we like to be served better. Then, look at tha map - RIPE serves Europe, yes. But CIs and even Russia is not Europe. I do not insist to have there independent LIR at once - but at least you must have some office there, with people speaking in English and Russion, and bank transferese available in Roubles. And there must be someone in Amsterdam who represents our interests, anyway. No matter if Ukrainian are too proud to be served by anyone except Europeans - let's go, or let's choose. I don't think Stesin have spoken about some political issues - just about the same /interests, language, currency/ issues. Through next they'll say _we'd like to be served by the GOD only -:)_. The main idea they (and others) have said was _we'd like to choose_. Now no one have any chance to choose - you must send fax to Amsterdam, transfere money yourself to the Amsterdam, and so on... You (we) can't get a ticket and fly to the RIPE at once - it takes a time to get visas etc. No anybody can phone to Amsterdam - it must be english-speaking person. And so on... That's the issue, just as _CIS is not only europe_ is the issue too. Let's drop out political aspects, of course. > like to ask you to not transfer the discussion about LIRs to the political/ > /national/etc levels, > > yours > > Edgar > am.nic > am.armentel > > > Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 239-10-10, N 13729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
I do not insist to have there independent LIR at once - but at least you must have some office there, with people speaking in English and Russion, and bank transferese available in Roubles. And there must be someone in Amsterdam who represents our interests, anyway.
The main idea they (and others) have said was _we'd like to choose_. Now no one have any chance to choose - you must send fax to Amsterdam, transfere money yourself to the Amsterdam, and so on... You (we) can't get a ticket and fly to the RIPE at once - it takes a time to get visas etc. No anybody can phone to Amsterdam - it must be english-speaking person. And so on...
Although I don't completely agree, I'd suggest RIPE to have someone who does speak Russian to serve the needs of Russian-speaking registries from the exSU. Regarding payment in roubles - I don't think this is worth to be discussed, because no country in the "CIS" has "hard" currency, and it will be unethical to pay RIPE in roubles or any other CIS currency - you understand me :-) I also had problems paying in ECU, but RIPE now accepts USD, so we have no problems here... IMHO, of course, regards Edgar
On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, Alexei Platonov wrote:
Hi,
I think there is some misunderstanding, may be due to the fact that some details are not clearly defined in the ripe-167 document.
The idea is _to start_ the process on the base of RosNIIROS, as far as it has done something already with this problem.
If we agree with the idea of RIR, then the work is to be done within some "collaborative entity" and the model of RIPE is acceptable. If we need, some international association can be formally established. I've already discussed it with some of Russian ISPs, and they also think so.
Of course, it's not acceptable that Russian Government will dictate something through RosNIIROS. The latter can play only _technical_ role (if it'll be decided that it is RosNIIROS that should do this work after initial period).
I didn't quite understand, Ucrainian ISPs don't like the idea Please, as the first step, write "Ukraine" rigthly:-( of RIR at all, or they don't like it to be based on some Yes, don't like absolute. organization (say, with international status) located in Moscow ?
What about Minsk, then ? :-) You can located in Kamchatka, this is your problem:-)
Best regards, Alexei Platonov RosNIIROS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ukrainian Academic and Research Network Petrovych Oleg OP18-RIPE e-mail: oleg@ICMP.Lviv.UA oleg@uar.net
It's amazing why someone who want to have the deal with the Amsterdam is against idea to have _additional_ point of service. And why don't you ask _we must be served by InterNIC directly_?
of RIR at all, or they don't like it to be based on some Yes, don't like absolute.
What about Minsk, then ? :-) You can located in Kamchatka, this is your problem:-) No, you are wrong.
RIR (call it by any name) MUST be in suck place that: - it's easy to achieve (by plane, train etc) for anyone who are served (no visas, no extra expansive hotels, etc); - it's easy to communicate (language, for example). - it's easy to pay. Minks or Moscow or Kiev - all three are satisfied to this; Kamchatka or Amsterdam - not.
According to Oleg Petrovych:
I didn't quite understand, Ucrainian ISPs don't like the idea
Please, as the first step, write "Ukraine" rigthly:-(
I'm sorry.
of RIR at all, or they don't like it to be based on some Yes, don't like absolute.
ok Best regards, Alexei Platonov
What's the buzz? Why are you so aggrevated? From the very beginning we were much confident that the Ukraine won't ever go for this, no single chance for that. There also are other contries in CIS wich probably won't accept this proposal as well. And it's not clear which countries will accept and which reject the proposal. Hence CIS had been chosen as a generic name. Had it been CIS (but not Ukraine) it would have certainly satisfied you but that's ridiculous. The whole idea of the document is to start a discussion in all CIS countries and let them decide are they supporting the idea or not. You (all or most or major Ukranian ISPs) seems to have made you choice - nice, nobody won't ever force you to receieve the service from so hated Russia, but what all this buzz, all these political speculations are for? Let other people decide by themselves, they certainly may have different views and different opinions and your country's situation doesn't apply to them.
Being a person who actually operate one of the major LIRs in Ukraine, UA.GU, with almost 5 years of experience of administering IP networks, I'd like to comment on both the approach of ripe-167 and on some actual statements of it.
You cerainly are throwing such a heavy weight against what seems to have no business with your business.
I'd also like to provide some proposals about how to improve the state of affairs at least for Ukraine.
This is certainly very good but has nothing to do with the proposal per se.
I'm Cc:-ing this message to all interested parties, in a hope that a broader discussion will start then.
Sure you do. You also would have done a good thing if your had you not used ripe-167 as a basis for your statements.
ripe-167 was also discussed by the Ukrainian First National Conference "Internet technologies in National Information Infrastrure", in Yalta, November 3-6, organized under supervision of Ukrainian Ministry of Information and National Agency for Informatization. This is why there wasn't an earlier reply -- now my comments are accomodating the results of the discussion.
Very nice. So let take your statement as opinion of Ukrainian ISPs toward the proposal and stop buzzin around about it. Other people will decide themselces and certainly not based on false assumption and political hatred.
Let's examine the document below.
-------------------------- ripe-167.txt -------------------------------- # # A Regional Internet Registry for the Commonwealth of Independent States # # Robert Blokzijl # Daniel Karrenberg # Alexei Platonov # 2 October 1997 # # Table of Contents # # 1.Scope # 2.Background # 3.Local Service Arrangement # 4.New Regional Registry # 5.Next Steps # 6.Addresses of the Authors # ______________________________________________________________ # # 1.Scope # # This memorandum is intended to focus discussion about the # establishment of a Regional Internet Registry serving the CIS and # surrounding areas. Public comments are invited. The ultimate aim of # this process is to achieve rough consensus about the issue within # the region concerned. This memo represents the views of the # individual authors only. It has not been endorsed by any # organisation. # # 2.Background # # Since the start of the RIPE NCC as a regional Internet registry in # April 1991 Russia and the other countries of the CIS (former USSR) # have been served by the RIPE NCC. Developments of the last few # years however suggest that it is difficult for the RIPE NCC to # serve all parts of this area because in practise there exist a # number of practical problems. These problems have to do with # circumstances caused by: # # - local language problems # This is not a problem. There is an axiom that at least for ISP there is at least one person onsite who has sufficient English skills to communicate with RIPE personnel.
What a certainity! "Axiom" - not less than that. You definitely talked to every ISP in every CIS country and they told you about that. How fun.
# - time zone differences # Assignment of IP address space and establishment of LIRs aren't a matter of minutes and even hours aren't always that critical. In any case, if the process will take some time, it's not that big a problem.
Apparently RIR has nothing to do but the things you mentioned. I wonder why there's lot of staff at RIPE and they hire more and more. Daniel, are you people mostly hanging around without anything to do? :-)
# - travel difficulties # # - effort necessary to organise coordination meetings
Mailing lists aren't that bad for coordination, anyway.
Sure they are. Another stone for RIPE - what are you spending money for - meetings ain't necessary, "anyway". :-)
# If has been suggested more than once that the countries of the CIS # in fact form a separate region from Europe that needed special # regional support.
This thesis isn't historically or politically correct. First of all, CIS isn't something solid or clearly defined, xUSSR is a much better definition.
Oh, you are looking for additinal support, aren't. You would habe been more happy had the document referenced to exUSSR - then Baltic countries would have been involved (certainly on your side). No, thanks - they already have shown some concern, even with "CIS", which under no circumstances refers to them.
Some countries of xUSSR belong to Eastern Europe, culturally and historically. Others are much closer to Middle East. And anyway, this is a set of _different_ countries, often they are much more isolated one from another than any given pair of Western European countries. Reality is: there isn't such clear "region" as CIS.
Is there a "clear" region as Middle East? Asia/Pacific? Europe after all? Guided by your approach - no. CIS *is* a formal entity, they even have some govermental bodies. You seems not to understand one point (and it's probably not clearly stated in the document) - the would-be RIR will serve *some* countries in CIS region and any other country that may decide (by majority, or by consensus) to receive the services from it.
# Because of these difficulties the RIPE NCC has cooperated with the # Russian Institute of Public Networks, RosNIIROS. RosNIIROS is also # known by its english acronym: RIPN. RosNIIROS have acted since # 1992, in close cooperation with RIPE NCC, as a Local IR of last # resort. They also support the Local IR activities of a significant # number of ISPs in the region. # # 3.Local Service Arrangement # # As everywhere else in the world, also Russia and the CIS have seen # a rapid growth in Internet activities, including a growth in the # number of ISPs. Currently about 100 ISPs are active in the region, # of which around 60 are located in Russia.
If the above statement was supplied by some statistics and numbers, the picture might be much more clear. As for me, I consider the total of 100 is somewhat underestimated.
There are about 500 acting ISPs in Russian alone, but most of them are not receiving and probably will never receive services from RIR (RIPE or any other) directly, they talk to their upstream providers. Are there more than 30 ISPs paying for services to RIPE in the Ukraine? I doubt it (just checked - 17, not counting multi-nationals; in Russia there are 62).
# The current growth is # about 3 new ISPs per month. Most of the new ISPs are located in the # Urals region and further east in Siberia.
Note: Urals and Siberia are parts of a single country -- Russia.
Nice excersize in geography.
# Because of this growth # and the difficulties described above, the RIPE NCC is exploring # ways to ensure optimal service for these registries. # # The RIPE NCC are currently considering to ask RosNIIROS to provide # full local support equivalent to that supplied by the Amsterdam # RIPE office to local registries in the region that wish to use it. # The NCC would remain fully responsible for operations including # service level and quality. The NCC would provide all necessary # resources to RosNIIROS. Local registries in the region would # continue to have a service agreement with the RIPE NCC but have the # option to receive service according to their preference from either # RosNIIROS or the RIPE NCC, but not both at the same time. We # envisage to start this arrangement sometime during the first # quarter of 1998. Of course all this will happen under the guidance # of the RIPE Local IR working group and IANA # # The subsequent period can then be used by RosNIIROS to gain # experience and increase the acceptance of their service. This time # will also be used to get a clearer idea of the exact extent of the # region served by the potential RIR. We expect this period to last # at least 12 months but not more than 24 months. # # 4.New Regional Registry # # We expect that the above arrangement will work well. Because of # that it will eventually be used by the majority of the Local IR s # in the region. Steps will then be taken to convert the local # service arrangement into its own Regional Internet Registry # separate from the RIPE NCC. A prerequisite for this is widespread # acceptance, appropriate governance mechanisms and a truly # international scope. # # This whole process needs active involvement of all ISP's in the # region in the governance of the Regional IR RosNIIROS will actively # pursue to gain the acceptance and help to put the appropriate # governance mechanisms in place. # # 5.Next Steps # # The authors invite a public discussion about this process # especially within the CIS region but also within RIPE in general. # RIPE NCC and RosNIIROS will take preparatory steps late this year. # If the discussion reveals no serious objections the local service # arrangement will start sometime during Q1/1998.
Everything below are just a speculations and you confessed in that yourself they are just that (though he shyly called them "questions"). The conclusion is another example of political nonsense brought into this, and threatenning with "boycotting" is a pure example of it. Sure, the issue in question has some political implications and most people are aware of it, but we are trying to distantiate from it by all means. You are bringing it, and only it into the discussion in a very rude manner. Please restarin from it. And, BTW, you seems to forgot what you have promised above: : I'd also like to provide some proposals about how to : improve the state of affairs at least for Ukraine. Though, I'm very glad you did, as I said above.
What are the conclusion of reviewing this document?
1. The document is based on political and historical ideas from an epoque of 5 years ago. They aren't correct anymore. 2. The document doesn't provide a solid set of argumentation, neither in favor of "RR for xUSSR countries" creation itself, nor in favor of creation of this RR in Moscow.
As one can't get enough information from the document itself, what might be at the background of it?
a. RosNIIROS is a governmental institution, it isn't a collaborative organisation. It's activity reflects the policy of a single government -- Russian -- and this policy often directly contradicts the interests of other xUSSR countries.
b. In the nearest past, Russian government started establishing a policy of strong governmental regulation for Internet activity on Russian territory.
c. RosNIIROS isn't a single entity in Russia trying to achieve the major role in regulating and directing Internet activity. Naturally, they also might have an interest in broadening their role to the whole xUSSR, to get a bonus in this "competition".
d. Holding an RR for a set of adjucent countries will allow Russian governmental institutions to monitor Internet activities there and even get some influence on them.
e. Being an RR allows providing of the service involves getting some funds from the customers, in this case -- from ISPs. Probably, governmental funding of RosNIIROS isn't enough for them today, and additional funding is badly needed.
These are my guesses and impressions, not clear facts. These are _questions_. But one can draw some conclusions even from questions.
According to discussions with collegues and other interested parties, here and at Yalta conference, I'd like to finish my comments with the following conclusions:
Most Ukrainian ISPs are voting against an attempt to establish an "RR for CIS"; what is CIS, anyway? By the way, Russia is a federation itself, so Russia alone is in fact a region. So creating of RR for Russia in RosNIIROS would be much more correct, and make it so.
In case RIPE will create a RIPN-based "RR for CIS" it would be boycotted by most Ukrainian ISPs due to unclear political and financial reasons of it's creation. We prefer dealing with RIPE directly -- our contributions to RIPE are pretty sufficient for this. As for new and young LIRs in Ukraine -- they in fact do have personnel who know English. Also Kyiv is much closer to Europe than to Siberia.
# 6.Addresses of the Authors # # Robert Blokzijl # RIPE Chairman # <k13@nikhef.nl> # # Daniel Karrenberg # RIPE NCC Manager # <dfk@ripe.net> # # Alexei Platonov # RosNIIROS (RIPN) Director # <plat@ripn.net> # ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Best regards, Andrew Stesin
nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
-- Igor V. Semenyuk Internet: iga@sovam.com SOVAM Teleport Phone: +7 095 258 4170 Moscow, Russia Fax: +7 095 258 4133
Being a person who actually operate one of the major LIRs in Ukraine, UA.GU, with almost 5 years of experience of administering IP networks, I'd like to comment on both the approach of ripe-167 and on some actual statements of it.
From my experience money transfers to Russia would not be easier ;). Moreover, we are serving both Ukraine and Israel, which is not
Being the person in charge of UA.LUCKYNET I would definitely agree with Mr.Stesin (despite the fact we work for competing companies ;). I don't think that, Russia being now a foreign state, servicing LIRs from there would make any difference from being served by RIPE itself _even if ROSNIIROS would do the job right_. We have no problems whatsoever either with the language or with money transfers directly to RIPE. part of CIS ;) Since RIPE-167 allows us the free choice, I would like to make an official statement in the name of UA.LUCKYNET: We would like to be served by RIPE itself in the future. And let me thank RIPE for the work they've already done for us. -- Igor Romanenko @..@ Office: igor@lucky.net, +380-(44)-244-34-80 (----) Home: igor@frog.kiev.ua ( | | ) http://www.lucky.net/~igor/ " " "Don't point the gun at anything you don't intend to shoot" Model 357four Owners Manual
Dear Mirjam, dear Daniel, Robert, Mr. Postel, and others, as ripe-167 story goes on, I'd like to inform you about some new impressions and information we got with regard to it. Abstract: Ukrainian LIRs in their vaste majority would not agree with the Russian approach there and vote against the project of a new RIR in Moscow. As you already know, a conference of LIR' represantatives from Russia took place in Moscow, January 22. Ukrainian representatives were also present (4 delegations from major Ukrainian LIRs, me among them). During the direct conversations with "new RIR in Moscow" project initiators many aspects became much more clear. Here my opinions are. 1. During the meeting, *nothing* from the argumentation provided in ripe-167 was recognized by community as a sugnificant argument which clarifies the "new RIR" approach. Document authors didn't even bother defending their former argumentation. I got an opinion that argumentation given in ripe-167 was written with the only goal to convince RIPE and IANA, it's pretty much irrelevant to the current state of affairs here. 2. It seems that the idea of "new RIR in Moscow" has a plain political background, with a scope limited to a single (though big) country -- Russia, or even to a single city -- Moscow. Our Russian collegues are now facing the trend of their goverment trying to establish a certain degree of control over Internet business in Russia. They also recognize that IP address space distribution is one of the most important things to ISP business. So they decided to extend the scope and sugnificance of RosNIIROS registry as much as possible, probably in order to prevent "some others" (whos?) attempt to monopolise IP space redistribution *in Russia*. 3. The very idea of defining a "region" for the projected RIR in terms of politics, not geography (as opposed to the existing practice) -- is not occasional, this is semi-intentional. The abbreviation "CIS" should really be understood as "a sphere of Russian business and political interests". Some details. Ukraine is a large East European country with population of about 50 million comparatively educated and skilled people (as opposed to about 150+ million population of Russia). The whole territory of Ukraine is in European continent. The estimated size of Internet (and similar) services market here is comparative to Russian. From the other hand, Ukraine got about 3 year delay in social, technological et al. development compared to Russia (partially due to the fact that Russia monopolized many achievements and infrastructure of ex-USSR). So Russia has it's business and communication structures being developed faster now and the market is more tight so far. Naturally, Russian companies are interested in joining Ukrainian market, where they might become a stronger players. Consider also the fact that Ukrainian ISPs all were the customers of their Russian collegues (note the ex-USSR infrastructure above) some 2-3 years ago, and were getting sugnificant amounts of funds from Ukraine. Being a RIR (esp. in case RIPE will delegate them monopolistic rights at the territory mentioned) will let certain people and organisations to continue getting their "traditional" funds from other countries, as they used to do before. 4. Also note that RIRs tend to have a sugnificant influence on the technical policies and "technical fashion" among their customers; also this means access to technical information about them and ability to monitor the development of their networks. With RIPE (RNA) this is not an issue for us, as RIPE doesn't represent any single (or group) entity who has strong business interests in Ukraine or anyone who is interested in monitoring our development. And with RosNIIROS this *is* an issue potentially. RosNIIROS doesn't represent a voluntary association of any kind, there isn't one even in a single Russia so far. RosNIIROS is a semi-govermental organization, established as a daughter structure of Moscow "Relcom" company; and Relcom venture is wellknown for it's numerous and continued attempts to become a monopolist on Russian Internet services market; and recently lost a sugnificant share in Ukrainian market due to rapid development of Ukrainian communication infrastructure, which allowed us to get a choice of whom to pay for services. A RIR in Russia, which will tend to fall under the influence of Russian goverment and several big semi-monopolistic companies, will be probably able to cope with intra-Russia issues, but will also serve the interests of Russian business and politics; it won't be able to serve the interests of international community. Baltic countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) tend to avoid just *any* contact with Russia due to the reasons above; we in Ukraine aren't so radical, but our reaction continues to be strictly negative. Being an official representative of LIR UA.GU, I'd like to get a confirmation that our registry will be served by RIPE directly in the forseeable future. We'd also like to see an official confirmation from RIPE, of the fact that any new LIR at Ukrainian territory will *always* be either served by RIPE directly or will have a choice between direct service contract from RIPE or indirect -- from other RIPE office wherever it might be established in future (Moscow, Berlin, Istambul, Kiev... who cares?) Thanks a lot for your attention. Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Hi, No comments on this literary work. Sorry, only one: RosNIIROS has been established by the State Committee for Higher Education and Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute". Phantom of Relcom Company is still needed ? Regards, Alexei Platonov According to Andrew Stesin:
Dear Mirjam, dear Daniel, Robert, Mr. Postel, and others,
as ripe-167 story goes on, I'd like to inform you about some new impressions and information we got with regard to it.
Abstract: Ukrainian LIRs in their vaste majority would not agree with the Russian approach there and vote against the project of a new RIR in Moscow.
As you already know, a conference of LIR' represantatives from Russia took place in Moscow, January 22. Ukrainian representatives were also present (4 delegations from major Ukrainian LIRs, me among them). During the direct conversations with "new RIR in Moscow" project initiators many aspects became much more clear. Here my opinions are.
1. During the meeting, *nothing* from the argumentation provided in ripe-167 was recognized by community as a sugnificant argument which clarifies the "new RIR" approach. Document authors didn't even bother defending their former argumentation. I got an opinion that argumentation given in ripe-167 was written with the only goal to convince RIPE and IANA, it's pretty much irrelevant to the current state of affairs here.
2. It seems that the idea of "new RIR in Moscow" has a plain political background, with a scope limited to a single (though big) country -- Russia, or even to a single city -- Moscow.
Our Russian collegues are now facing the trend of their goverment trying to establish a certain degree of control over Internet business in Russia.
They also recognize that IP address space distribution is one of the most important things to ISP business. So they decided to extend the scope and sugnificance of RosNIIROS registry as much as possible, probably in order to prevent "some others" (whos?) attempt to monopolise IP space redistribution *in Russia*.
3. The very idea of defining a "region" for the projected RIR in terms of politics, not geography (as opposed to the existing practice) -- is not occasional, this is semi-intentional.
The abbreviation "CIS" should really be understood as "a sphere of Russian business and political interests".
Some details. Ukraine is a large East European country with population of about 50 million comparatively educated and skilled people (as opposed to about 150+ million population of Russia). The whole territory of Ukraine is in European continent. The estimated size of Internet (and similar) services market here is comparative to Russian. From the other hand, Ukraine got about 3 year delay in social, technological et al. development compared to Russia (partially due to the fact that Russia monopolized many achievements and infrastructure of ex-USSR). So Russia has it's business and communication structures being developed faster now and the market is more tight so far.
Naturally, Russian companies are interested in joining Ukrainian market, where they might become a stronger players. Consider also the fact that Ukrainian ISPs all were the customers of their Russian collegues (note the ex-USSR infrastructure above) some 2-3 years ago, and were getting sugnificant amounts of funds from Ukraine.
Being a RIR (esp. in case RIPE will delegate them monopolistic rights at the territory mentioned) will let certain people and organisations to continue getting their "traditional" funds from other countries, as they used to do before.
4. Also note that RIRs tend to have a sugnificant influence on the technical policies and "technical fashion" among their customers; also this means access to technical information about them and ability to monitor the development of their networks. With RIPE (RNA) this is not an issue for us, as RIPE doesn't represent any single (or group) entity who has strong business interests in Ukraine or anyone who is interested in monitoring our development.
And with RosNIIROS this *is* an issue potentially. RosNIIROS doesn't represent a voluntary association of any kind, there isn't one even in a single Russia so far. RosNIIROS is a semi-govermental organization, established as a daughter structure of Moscow "Relcom" company; and Relcom venture is wellknown for it's numerous and continued attempts to become a monopolist on Russian Internet services market; and recently lost a sugnificant share in Ukrainian market due to rapid development of Ukrainian communication infrastructure, which allowed us to get a choice of whom to pay for services.
A RIR in Russia, which will tend to fall under the influence of Russian goverment and several big semi-monopolistic companies, will be probably able to cope with intra-Russia issues, but will also serve the interests of Russian business and politics; it won't be able to serve the interests of international community. Baltic countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) tend to avoid just *any* contact with Russia due to the reasons above; we in Ukraine aren't so radical, but our reaction continues to be strictly negative.
Being an official representative of LIR UA.GU, I'd like to get a confirmation that our registry will be served by RIPE directly in the forseeable future. We'd also like to see an official confirmation from RIPE, of the fact that any new LIR at Ukrainian territory will *always* be either served by RIPE directly or will have a choice between direct service contract from RIPE or indirect -- from other RIPE office wherever it might be established in future (Moscow, Berlin, Istambul, Kiev... who cares?)
Thanks a lot for your attention.
Best regards, Andrew Stesin
nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Dear Alexei, Should I remeber our colleagues who establish the Relcom company, one of the largest ISPs in Russia? The same Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute". So, RosNIIROS has the same "father" as the Relcom company. Should we delegate RIR rights to RosNIIROS? I think it's rather ritoric question... Vladimir. Alexei Platonov wrote:
Hi,
No comments on this literary work.
Sorry, only one: RosNIIROS has been established by the State Committee for Higher Education and Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute".
Phantom of Relcom Company is still needed ?
Regards, Alexei Platonov
According to Andrew Stesin:
Dear Mirjam, dear Daniel, Robert, Mr. Postel, and others,
as ripe-167 story goes on, I'd like to inform you about some new impressions and information we got with regard to it.
Abstract: Ukrainian LIRs in their vaste majority would not agree with the Russian approach there and vote against the project of a new RIR in Moscow.
As you already know, a conference of LIR' represantatives from Russia took place in Moscow, January 22. Ukrainian representatives were also present (4 delegations from major Ukrainian LIRs, me among them). During the direct conversations with "new RIR in Moscow" project initiators many aspects became much more clear. Here my opinions are.
1. During the meeting, *nothing* from the argumentation provided in ripe-167 was recognized by community as a sugnificant argument which clarifies the "new RIR" approach. Document authors didn't even bother defending their former argumentation. I got an opinion that argumentation given in ripe-167 was written with the only goal to convince RIPE and IANA, it's pretty much irrelevant to the current state of affairs here.
2. It seems that the idea of "new RIR in Moscow" has a plain political background, with a scope limited to a single (though big) country -- Russia, or even to a single city -- Moscow.
Our Russian collegues are now facing the trend of their goverment trying to establish a certain degree of control over Internet business in Russia.
They also recognize that IP address space distribution is one of the most important things to ISP business. So they decided to extend the scope and sugnificance of RosNIIROS registry as much as possible, probably in order to prevent "some others" (whos?) attempt to monopolise IP space redistribution *in Russia*.
3. The very idea of defining a "region" for the projected RIR in terms of politics, not geography (as opposed to the existing practice) -- is not occasional, this is semi-intentional.
The abbreviation "CIS" should really be understood as "a sphere of Russian business and political interests".
Some details. Ukraine is a large East European country with population of about 50 million comparatively educated and skilled people (as opposed to about 150+ million population of Russia). The whole territory of Ukraine is in European continent. The estimated size of Internet (and similar) services market here is comparative to Russian. From the other hand, Ukraine got about 3 year delay in social, technological et al. development compared to Russia (partially due to the fact that Russia monopolized many achievements and infrastructure of ex-USSR). So Russia has it's business and communication structures being developed faster now and the market is more tight so far.
Naturally, Russian companies are interested in joining Ukrainian market, where they might become a stronger players. Consider also the fact that Ukrainian ISPs all were the customers of their Russian collegues (note the ex-USSR infrastructure above) some 2-3 years ago, and were getting sugnificant amounts of funds from Ukraine.
Being a RIR (esp. in case RIPE will delegate them monopolistic rights at the territory mentioned) will let certain people and organisations to continue getting their "traditional" funds from other countries, as they used to do before.
4. Also note that RIRs tend to have a sugnificant influence on the technical policies and "technical fashion" among their customers; also this means access to technical information about them and ability to monitor the development of their networks. With RIPE (RNA) this is not an issue for us, as RIPE doesn't represent any single (or group) entity who has strong business interests in Ukraine or anyone who is interested in monitoring our development.
And with RosNIIROS this *is* an issue potentially. RosNIIROS doesn't represent a voluntary association of any kind, there isn't one even in a single Russia so far. RosNIIROS is a semi-govermental organization, established as a daughter structure of Moscow "Relcom" company; and Relcom venture is wellknown for it's numerous and continued attempts to become a monopolist on Russian Internet services market; and recently lost a sugnificant share in Ukrainian market due to rapid development of Ukrainian communication infrastructure, which allowed us to get a choice of whom to pay for services.
A RIR in Russia, which will tend to fall under the influence of Russian goverment and several big semi-monopolistic companies, will be probably able to cope with intra-Russia issues, but will also serve the interests of Russian business and politics; it won't be able to serve the interests of international community. Baltic countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) tend to avoid just *any* contact with Russia due to the reasons above; we in Ukraine aren't so radical, but our reaction continues to be strictly negative.
Being an official representative of LIR UA.GU, I'd like to get a confirmation that our registry will be served by RIPE directly in the forseeable future. We'd also like to see an official confirmation from RIPE, of the fact that any new LIR at Ukrainian territory will *always* be either served by RIPE directly or will have a choice between direct service contract from RIPE or indirect -- from other RIPE office wherever it might be established in future (Moscow, Berlin, Istambul, Kiev... who cares?)
Thanks a lot for your attention.
Best regards, Andrew Stesin
nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
On Wed, 28 Jan 1998, Andrew Stesin wrote: ...skipped
A RIR in Russia, which will tend to fall under the influence of Russian goverment and several big semi-monopolistic companies, will be probably able to cope with intra-Russia issues, but will also serve the interests of Russian business and politics; it won't be able to serve the interests of international community. Baltic countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) tend to avoid just *any* contact with Russia due to the reasons above; we in Ukraine aren't so radical, but our reaction continues to be strictly negative.
Dear Mr. Andrew Stesin, I 'm attaching a message from Mr. A,Platonov on invitation to Moscow meeting (hope he will understand and forgive me): From plat@ripn.net Mon Feb 2 21:07:56 1998 Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:12:12 +0300 (MSK) From: Alexei Platonov <plat@ripn.net> To: Albertas Ramanauskas <albertas@taide.lt> Cc: plat@ripn.net, hostmaster@taide.net Subject: Re: ����������� �� ��������� ISP [The following text is in the "koi8-r" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] Hi, According to Albertas Ramanauskas: > > Dear Mr.A.Platonov, > > First of all I want to thank you for invitation to the meeting, > which will be held in Moscow, January 22nd. As we understand, it will be > meeting of working group to discuss RIPE-167 document "A Regional Internet > Registry for the Commonwealth of Independent States". > We have read the document and found out, that Lithuanian LIRs are > beyond the scope of document (also see our correspondence October 3rd). yes, you are right > > We have asked other Lithuania based LIRs express theirs opinion and > have to inform you they also wish to be served by RIPE NCC. > > So far we don't find any obstacles in collaboration with RIPE. > > Believe you will find a solution which is the best for this huge > region. We are looking for close cooperation and partnership. Thank you very much. > > Success and best regards, > //Albertas > > ==================================================== > Albertas Ramanauskas ph. +370 2 72 12 89 > Manager, Taide NOC fax. +370 2 72 76 52 > Liepyno 7, Vilnius mob. +370 99 3 56 01 > Lithuania albertas@taide.lt > http://www.taide.net > ==================================================== > > > Best regards, Alexei Platonov I hope we all need to reject some old sterereotypes and look forward for partnership and cooperation. If Russia want to establish new RIR, which (according to authors of the document) could solve specific problems, let them do it! If any country want to join Russian RIR, we have no right to contradict - it's their choise. The only problem, that there are no "domestic" LIRs registered in some CIS countries at all (GE, MD, TM, Tadjikistan), or it's only 1-2 registered (AM, AZ,KG,KZ, UZ) - who will decide on behalf of them)? On the other hand, nobody could compel 18 Ukrainian LIRs (as well as Georgian, Moldavian, Chinese etc.) to be served by RosNIIROS instead of RIPE NCC. With best regards from "radical and nationalist" :) Rimas Janusauskas, Taide Net Hostmaster ______________________________________________________________________ P.O.Box 543 e-mail: rimas@taide.lt fax/phone: +370 2 223541 LT-2024 Vilnius phone: +370 2 312625 mobile: +370 99 46266 Lithuania ______________________________________________________________________
If Russia want to establish new RIR, which (according to authors of the document) could solve specific problems, let them do it! If any country want to join Russian RIR, we have no right to contradict - it's their choise. The only problem, that there are no "domestic" LIRs registered in some CIS countries at all (GE, MD, TM, Tadjikistan), or it's only 1-2 registered (AM, AZ,KG,KZ, UZ) - who will decide on behalf of them)?
I agree with your first statement but did not understand the second. What you mean by "who will decide on behalf of them"? We do decide for us. Thanks God there is no USSR anymore. And CIS is an illusion. So if some people in some countries would like to establish RIR in Moscow: Let it be so. AM NIC is not interested.
On the other hand, nobody could compel 18 Ukrainian LIRs (as well as Georgian, Moldavian, Chinese etc.) to be served by RosNIIROS instead of RIPE NCC.
Exactemont.
With best regards from "radical and nationalist" :)
Well, I don't think it's an issue of nationalism in the common sense of this word: we do not need Moscow's guidance or protection. Rule RIPE NCC in Amsterdam (good city :) Edgar der Danielyan
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Edgar Danielyan wrote:
If Russia want to establish new RIR, which (according to authors of the document) could solve specific problems, let them do it! If any country want to join Russian RIR, we have no right to contradict - it's their choise. The only problem, that there are no "domestic" LIRs registered in some CIS countries at all (GE, MD, TM, Tadjikistan), or it's only 1-2 registered (AM, AZ,KG,KZ, UZ) - who will decide on behalf of them)?
I agree with your first statement but did not understand the second. What you mean by "who will decide on behalf of them"? We do decide for us. Thanks God there is no USSR anymore. And CIS is an illusion. So if some people in some countries would like to establish RIR in Moscow: Let it be so. AM NIC is not interested.
I expect, that national LIRs in CIS countries need to decide by which RIR they prefer to be served. The decision must be made on a voluntary basis. Which RIR will serve GE, MD, TM homed LIRs if there no LIRs who need to decide? Could decision of the only existing LIR will be compulsory regulation for future established LIRs? I couldn't found strict answers on questions above in document. RIPE-167 states: "Local registries in the region would continue to have a service agreement with the RIPE NCC but have the option to receive service according to their preference from either RosNIIROS or the RIPE NCC, but not both at the same time." IMO, every LIR is free to decide about the RIR they want to be served, and it could happen, that LIRs at the same country will be served by different RIRs. As I understand, the main difference will be service language: official working language of RIPE NCC will be English, RosNIIROS will serve their Russian speaking customers. In that case it must be clearly stated in document. Maybe the title of document "A Regional Internet Registry for the Commonwealth of Independent States" isn't well turned and could be changed to "A Regional Internet Registry for the Russian speaking community"?
Rule RIPE NCC in Amsterdam (good city :)
With no doubt! And RIPE NCC has a really pretty team. :) Rimas Janusauskas, Taide Net Hostmaster ______________________________________________________________________ P.O.Box 543 e-mail: rimas@taide.lt fax/phone: +370 2 223541 LT-2024 Vilnius phone: +370 2 312625 mobile: +370 99 46266 Lithuania ______________________________________________________________________
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Rimas Janusauskas wrote:
Maybe the title of document "A Regional Internet Registry for the Commonwealth of Independent States" isn't well turned and could be changed to "A Regional Internet Registry for the Russian speaking community"?
Yeah, "A Volunteer Club of Russian Language Amateurs". :) I personally have an opinion that ripe-167 in it's current form is almost obsolete; the document should be discarded and a new edition of the proposal worked out, this time -- by a *community*, by a group of Russian authors at least, but not a single person who represent a single Moscow organisation. I hope that if "ripe-167-NG" document will be created this way, it will obtain better and solid argumentation and more clear and clean logic inside it. Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Hi Edgar, On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Edgar Danielyan wrote:
God there is no USSR anymore. And CIS is an illusion. So if some people in some countries would like to establish RIR in Moscow: Let it be so. AM NIC is not interested.
Great, we second your point. But consider the following possible scenario: You ask RIPE for service and all of a sudden they politely direct you to Moscow -- "*that* RIR is yours since mid-1998". "Wow!" -- you say -- "but I didn't ask them to care of me! and I didn't even agree to delegate them any right to do so! I want a freedom of choice between two services at least!" "Keep calm man!" -- you get back -- "that's how European democracy works. If you were silent during all that discussion before the decision, and the only ones who were shouting actively were the Moscow guys -- we decided that you just neither care, nor have any negative objections; so this is equal as if you voted `YES', so man, to Moscow is your way!" Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Rimas Janusauskas wrote:
If Russia want to establish new RIR, which (according to authors of the document) could solve specific problems, let them do it! If any country want to join Russian RIR, we have no right to contradict - it's their choise.
You are not right. Internet is worldwide, but people in some countrieshave only restricted Internet conectivity - there is a censorship on Internet in some countries. In some countries, religion is censoring, in others it is sex. There are countries where Internet is accessible only for designated group of citizens. If we keep silence, we could live to only restricted connectivity in our country in the future, too. Democracy brought to me not only the possibility to buy tropical fruits, but especially if I wish to connect to the Internet, I may send my requirements to Amsterodam - without any permission from Moscow. Unfortunately there is no law of nations for Internet like the Geneva Convention. There are no human rights for Internet. The Internet is based on keeping the word only. It is necessary to be very careful if one wants to delegate authority to countries without democracy traditions. In that case, there is the possibility to create areas with resticted Internet access. For example, the areas with restricted Internet access could be created for rebulic fighting for Independecy. Mr. Andrew Stesin informs European Internet Community of his impressions from Moscow meeting. I think, his doubts are well-founded. For example, the main reason for establishing RIR in CIS are the time zone differences (I know this problem. Time zone differences are unpleasant. It's quite normal in e-mail correspondence between Europa and America, to exchange 1 mail daily only due to time differences). Reading RIPE-167, I expected establishing LIR office for example in Novosibirsk and not in Moscow. Between Moscow and Amsterodam there is only 2 hours time difference. I do not understand the attempt to establish the LIR in Moscow, when RIPE NCC is the best office in the World.
On the other hand, nobody could compel 18 Ukrainian LIRs (as well as Georgian, Moldavian, Chinese etc.) to be served by RosNIIROS instead of RIPE NCC.
China can't be served by RIPE, China is served by Asia Pacific NetworkInformatin Center (look at http://www.apnic.net). Libor Dostalek The Czech Republic
participants (11)
-
Alex P. Rudnev -
Alexei Platonov -
Andrew Stesin -
edd＠computer.org -
Edgar Danielyan -
Igor Romanenko -
Igor V. Semenyuk -
Libor Dostalek -
Oleg Petrovych -
Rimas Janusauskas -
Vladimir Lebedev