Re: [ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting
Greetings,
"I" == Igor Romanenko <igor@office.lucky.net> writes: I> To: hostmaster@taide.net I> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 21:15:23 +0200 (EET) I> Cc: Mike.Norris@heanet.ie, ncc@ripe.net, lir-wg@ripe.net
OK, but what do you feel about the corollary: is a RIR free to choose any LIR that seeks service, or is it constrained to serve only those within a certain (or sometimes uncertain) geographical area? Before answering, remember what the E in RIPE, the A in ARIN and the AP in APNIC stand for.
Regards.
Mike Norris
Thanks Mike, it's a briliant remark!
Excerpt from RIPE-167:
If has been suggested more than once that the coun- tries of the CIS in fact form a separate region from Europe that needed special regional support.
I> Argh! Now you start to understand what RIPE-167 is really all about. IMHO that point was included just as a formal reason for creating yet another RIR. I never heard anything about making Ukraine or anybody else to be served by it against their will neither at that meeting nor in corresponding maillists. The only who spoke so were Ukrainian representatives. And what makes sense if Russia is situated in Asia as well as in Europe? It would sound a bit odd if we end up served half by RIPE and half by APNIC considering there are ISPs which serve clients in Vladivostok as well as in Moscow. I believe we definetely need a RIR and anybody who likes to work with it is welcome.
Sounds with no pardon... A huge region is treated as Terra ******* (self censored) Incognita with savage population.
I> It does not matter that much. I mean, I do not take this as an offense.
FYI: CIS countries are Russia, Ukraine, Belorussia, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaidjan, Kazakhstan, Kirgyzstan, Uzbekistan,Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan.
There is no denying the fact that part of them are in Europe or very close to it.
I> Addition: "and tend to aim at becoming part of Europian community"
IMHO the only difference between two EUROPEAN RIRs is working language (English for RIPE and Russian for RIPN).
I> Which is not difference at all, granted that all CIS countries I> as well as Baltic ones have their own respective languages. I> Add the fact that technicians normally _do_ speak English well I> enough to make "language matters" of small importance even for Russian LIRs. For some people there is no difference. For some other there is a difference. I like that manner to speak for all. Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too. Of course, that is possible to have Russian ( Kazakh, Tadjik, etc ) speaking people in RIPE office. Also it's possible to teach everybody concerned to speak English. And what would do people who cannot yet? Not to allow them to use Internet? And there _are_ technicians at least in Moscow and St. Petersbourg who does not know English enough to speak or write email. There are lots of people who can understand documents in English but not write something. Consider the difference between Europe and Russia ( and for that matter other CIS countries ) I> The other difference pointed out at Moscow meeting was payment I> in roubles which really does not make sense in other CIS or FSU countries. Well, maybe. Alas, there still are people and firms and ISP's which have no credit cards. And if the feature would be useful for some of them -- why to neglect it?
If it will be decided that the best solution to serve Russian speaking community is to create separate RIR (istead of employing some Russian speaking hostmasters at RIPE NCC, creating separate list like hostmaster-ru@ripe.net and so on), it seems essential that European LIRs might choose among the 2 European RIRs, but not vice versa, when some _authority_ will decide, that starting from day V. all LIRs in country CC will be served by appropriate RIR.
I> And the results may well turn to be disastrous. During the Moscow meeting I> some things were made quite obvious I> 1. There will be no eternal alternative. There will be finite test I> period after which all LIRs should be served by only one RIR. If the service is good enough and LIRS agree to it. As far as the RIPE-167 authors thought there might be problems to be served by RIPE if the RIR is functioning. Nothing else. I> 2. After the test period the decision should be made by some kind of voting. I> At first it seems that the voting rules (as outlined in Moscow I> meeting's statement) are really democratic. The decision should be I> made "based on agreement of not less then 2/3 of registered LIRs, I> functioning on the territory of each of the countries served" I> (translation is mine, I can send you the text in Russian if you like). I> Now, the question is: does this mean 2/3 of _all_ the LIRs I> in _all_ countries served? Simple arithmetic will show you that I> if this was the intended meaning, Russian LIRs will _always_ I> outvote any other. BTW, this could be the case with all the other I> votings, decisions and the like. I> 3. The fact that representatives of some countries were absent I> during the Moscow meeting will be taken as the indication I> that LIRs in these countries "do not care" rather then "do not agree". I> Mr.Stesin had already pointed this out. Let me show you an example: I> at Moscow meeting there were 4 LIRs from Ukraine. _All_ of them I> voted against the statement. The result was: the statement had been I> adopted nevertheless. I> ... However there was a separate opinion of Ukraine in the final statement. Some time later Kazakhstan ISPs sent a message agreeing to that meeting resume. And nobody but Ukraine said a word against that yet. My (private) general impression of that meeting is: Ukraine does not want to be served by RIR in Russia under any circumstances. On the other hand nobody insisted on that and nobody is going to. There is good enough future for Internet developing in Russia and it would make sense to found RIR for it and the countries from ex-USSR who would like to join it. They all are independent and have all rights to choose. I> I've sent all my remarks w.r.t. Moscow meeting to Mr.Karrenberg and will I> resend them to the list if there will be some interest
I hope that authors of the document are on the list and kindly invite them clearify the essence.
I> Sorry, but are you that naive? I've told all this during the Moscow meeting. I> Can you guess the answers?
Othervise we'll continue discussion about nothing.
I> Sorry, no. The more LIRs will ask questions about RIPE-167, the more I> obvious it will become what it is really aimed at. The more obvious I> it will become that the idea of CIS-RIR or FSU-RIR or whatever it will I> be called, does not meet that much appreciation in CIS/FSU/... I> The more difficult it will be for Mr.Platonov to advocate CIS-RIR I> in it's current (proposed) form. Cf. 3 above.
With best regards,
Rimas Janusauskas
I> Yours, I> -- I> Igor Romanenko @..@ I> Office: igor@lucky.net, +380-(44)-290-03-48 (----) I> Home: igor@frog.kiev.ua ( | | ) I> http://www.lucky.net/~igor/ " " I> "On the Internet nobody knows you are a Frog" -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergey A. Mukhin | violet@rosnet.net Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt from RIPE-167:
If has been suggested more than once that the coun- tries of the CIS in fact form a separate region from Europe that needed special regional support.
I> Argh! Now you start to understand what RIPE-167 is really all about.
IMHO that point was included just as a formal reason for creating yet another RIR.
Well, I meant that the definition of "region" in RIPE-167 is _political_ rather then _geographical_. Why so? If I remember correctly, TZ difference in Moscow and Far East is 9 hours ("Moscow time is 3 p.m.,... it's midnight in Petropavlosk-Kamchatsky" (c) Moscow radio ;). So why insist on TZ difference as the argument for RIR creation? (Note, this is only one example of contradictions or, better to say, inconsistencies in RIPE-167).
I never heard anything about making Ukraine or anybody else to be served by it against their will neither at that meeting nor in corresponding maillists. The only who spoke so were Ukrainian representatives.
Ukrainian representatives (and yours truly in particular) asked the following questions and got the following answers: Q: Will the alternative service be preserved in the future? A: No, it is not feasible for RIPE. Q: Then what will be after the trial period? A: LIRs will have no choice as to from what RIR they can get service. Q: How will it be decided who is served by what RIR? A: By some kind of voting. And now look at the meeting's statement (I've already quoted appropriate part of it). Q: How could this meeting, where there are representatives from Russia and Ukraine make decisions for other countries? A: It is not democratical centralism, we are talking about - it's European democracy. If representatives from other countries did not come, it is taken as a sign that they do not care, so we'll decide for them. (I'm _not_ sure about wording - anyway we have a copy of all the discussion on an audio tape ;)
And what makes sense if Russia is situated in Asia as well as in Europe? It would sound a bit odd if we end up served half by RIPE and half by APNIC considering there are ISPs which serve clients in Vladivostok as well as in Moscow. I believe we definetely need a RIR and anybody who likes to work with it is welcome.
See above w.r.t. TZ differences as an example.
IMHO the only difference between two EUROPEAN RIRs is working language (English for RIPE and Russian for RIPN).
I> Which is not difference at all, granted that all CIS countries I> as well as Baltic ones have their own respective languages. I> Add the fact that technicians normally _do_ speak English well I> enough to make "language matters" of small importance even for Russian LIRs ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
For some people there is no difference. For some other there is a difference. I like that manner to speak for all.
Where had I tried to speak "for all"? When I insisted on the existence of, say, Armenian language? Hope you are not going to deny it's existence ;)
Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, it seems that the two statements underlined above are not that far from each other.
Of course, that is possible to have Russian ( Kazakh, Tadjik, etc ) speaking people in RIPE office. Also it's possible to teach everybody concerned ^^^^^^^^^ to speak English. And what would do people who cannot yet? Not to allow them to use Internet?
Sorry, LIR's personnel is _not_ "everybody". And why, on Earth should people, who are just _using_ the Internet contact RIR directly?
And there _are_ technicians at least in Moscow and St. Petersbourg who does not know English enough to speak or write email. There are lots of people who can understand documents in English but not write something. Consider the difference between Europe and Russia ( and for that matter other CIS countries )
How are they working with RIPE now? ;)
I> The other difference pointed out at Moscow meeting was payment I> in roubles which really does not make sense in other CIS or FSU countries.
Well, maybe. Alas, there still are people and firms and ISP's which have no credit cards. And if the feature would be useful for some of them -- why to neglect it?
OK, so should this be one of the _main_ arguments for RIR creation? And again, when you are speaking about Russia - you are absolutely right, Not so for most other CIS countries, where rouble is a foreign currency.
I> And the results may well turn to be disastrous. During the Moscow meeting I> some things were made quite obvious I> 1. There will be no eternal alternative. There will be finite test I> period after which all LIRs should be served by only one RIR.
If the service is good enough and LIRS agree to it. As far as the RIPE-167 authors thought there might be problems to be served by RIPE if the RIR is functioning. Nothing else.
No prob. iff the choice will be free for _every_ LIR and iff _all_ newly established LIRs will have this choice from now on. Unfortunately, this is nearly equivalent to continuing alternative service.
I> 2. After the test period the decision should be made by some kind of voting. I> At first it seems that the voting rules (as outlined in Moscow I> meeting's statement) are really democratic. The decision should be I> made "based on agreement of not less then 2/3 of registered LIRs, I> functioning on the territory of each of the countries served" I> (translation is mine, I can send you the text in Russian if you like). I> Now, the question is: does this mean 2/3 of _all_ the LIRs I> in _all_ countries served? Simple arithmetic will show you that I> if this was the intended meaning, Russian LIRs will _always_ I> outvote any other. BTW, this could be the case with all the other I> votings, decisions and the like. I> 3. The fact that representatives of some countries were absent I> during the Moscow meeting will be taken as the indication I> that LIRs in these countries "do not care" rather then "do not agree". I> Mr.Stesin had already pointed this out. Let me show you an example: I> at Moscow meeting there were 4 LIRs from Ukraine. _All_ of them I> voted against the statement. The result was: the statement had been I> adopted nevertheless.
You have not commented on this. Do you agree with the possibilities outlined above?
I> ...
However there was a separate opinion of Ukraine in the final statement.
It seemed the only reasonable way to make the community hear our voice. Otherwise it would be mere "20 for, 4 against, everything is just fine"
Some time later Kazakhstan ISPs sent a message agreeing to that meeting resume. And nobody but Ukraine said a word against that yet.
And later Russian Academy of Sciences pretended to be the founder of new RIR instead of RIPN. And during the meeting some Russian LIRs voted against the statement. So what?
My (private) general impression of that meeting is: Ukraine does not want to be served by RIR in Russia under any circumstances. On the other hand nobody insisted on that and nobody is going to. There is good enough future for Internet developing in Russia and it would make sense to found RIR for it and the countries from ex-USSR who would like to join it. They all are independent and have all rights to choose.
Please, stop thinking in "country" categories. Paraphrasing you: "LIRs in any country are independent and have all rights to choose." Now, please, reread your own words: "RIR for it and the countries from ex-USSR who would like to join it." ^^^^^^^^^ So, how will you decide if _the country_ would like to join it? Some LIRs would, some would not. And _making_ them to follow your way just because initially 2 or three of them agreed to this is... khm... non-democratic.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergey A. Mukhin | violet@rosnet.net Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Igor Romanenko @..@ Office: igor@lucky.net, +380-(44)-290-03-48 (----) Home: igor@frog.kiev.ua ( | | ) http://www.lucky.net/~igor/ " " "On the Internet nobody knows you are a Frog"
Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too.
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. Soviet Union is history now for more than 6 (!) years. During this period there emerged new generation of people graduated from high schools etc. Let's make registry for "former Roma Empire", why not? We must look into future, not past. Regards, Sergey Gulchuck, ISP LuckyNet Kyiv, Ukraine
Sergey Gulchuck, wrote:>
Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too.
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. Soviet Union is history now for more than 6 (!) years. During this period there emerged new generation of people graduated from high schools etc. Let's make registry for "former Roma Empire", why not? We must look into future, not past.
As I said before, basedon my own experiance, speaking Russian is contentious. Best to use English and be done with it. Use Russian for the Russian speakers if need be, and English for everyone else. DON'T use Russian as default for slavs, it's offensive to some.... Aleks
According to Sergey Gulchuck:
Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too.
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people.
^^^^^^^^^^ This is the English translation for "Moskali" ? May be we shall stop this discussion which is interesting for just a few people from the list? The Ukrainian ISPs introduced their coordinated decision and in fact you have nothing to add. Or may be you have too much free time ? Regards, Alexei Platonov
Soviet Union is history now for more than 6 (!) years. During this period there emerged new generation of people graduated from high schools etc. Let's make registry for "former Roma Empire", why not? We must look into future, not past.
Regards, Sergey Gulchuck, ISP LuckyNet Kyiv, Ukraine
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. ^^^^^^^^^^ This is the English translation for "Moskali" ?
erm, technicaly, it's Muscovites. Only the Americans have used any other spelling.
May be we shall stop this discussion which is interesting for just a few people from the list? The Ukrainian ISPs introduced their coordinated decision and in fact you have nothing to add. Or may be you have too much free time ?
Yes, please; Let's try and focus on the issue at hand... aleks
Alexei Platonov wrote:
According to Sergey Gulchuck:
Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too.
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people.
^^^^^^^^^^ This is the English translation for "Moskali" ?
May be we shall stop this discussion which is interesting for just a few people from the list? The Ukrainian ISPs introduced their coordinated decision and in fact you have nothing to add. Or may be you have too much free time ?
Looking at the large number of replies on the [ripe-167] topic I think that number of people who interested in this discussion is not just "few". Moreover, in this discussion participating peolple not only from CIS countries, but all over the Europe. I'm looking at the discussion and it reminds me a situation in FidoNet at the early 90th. There was a try to separate CIS countries netwokrs from Europe! Our "independent" Moscow's guys wanted to create Zone 7 for CIS, independend from Zone 2 (Europe) with own Zone Coordinator and all other attributes of power, for example rights to assign Fido network numbers for geographical regions. Formal reasons was absolutely the same: language issues, time zone difference etc., etc. Thanks God, that "coup" was unseccussful. Now the history repeating, but at this time with Internet. I hope the finish of the story will be the same. I want to make clear for the audience the real reason of this "independance movement": MONOPOLIZATION OF IP NETWORK ADDRESSES ASSIGNMENT IN RUSSIA AND OTHER CIS COUNTRIES BY ROSNIIROS (RIPN). RIPN had already monopolized the domain name delegation under ".ru", and the only thing this they doesn't hove at this time is control under the network addresses. If they receive this control, can you imagine the amount of money that will be "informally" squezeed from russian LIR's for the good relationship from the RIPN side? I can. Vladimir.
Dear Alexei, On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. ^^^^^^^^^^ This is the English translation for "Moskali" ?
:)
May be we shall stop this discussion which is interesting for just a few people from the list?
Do you think that things will go better if you will keep them in silence and darkness?
The Ukrainian ISPs introduced their coordinated decision and in fact you have nothing to add. Or may be you have too much free time ?
Would you mind placing some creative comments here, please? (Shutting up those who do not agree is a Bad Thing (tm) -- BTW). How about my proposal of creating a ripe-167+ document, reviewed, revised, more solid and with more representative authorship?
Regards, Alexei Platonov
Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
According to Andrew Stesin:
Dear Alexei,
On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. ^^^^^^^^^^ This is the English translation for "Moskali" ?
:)
May be we shall stop this discussion which is interesting for just a few people from the list?
Do you think that things will go better if you will keep them in silence and darkness?
I do not think so. I want to see more constructive discussion.
The Ukrainian ISPs introduced their coordinated decision and in fact you have nothing to add. Or may be you have too much free time ?
Would you mind placing some creative comments here, please? (Shutting up those who do not agree is a Bad Thing (tm) -- BTW).
How about my proposal of creating a ripe-167+ document, reviewed, revised, more solid and with more representative authorship?
Yes, I like it. I want only to mention that this is just what we decided in Moscow (only ripe-167+ was not mentioned): to establish RIPE office and continue to work on documents on RIR within working group which is open to all interested parties. By the way, the working group has already prepared some documents and is ready to submit them for starting discussion. The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including the RIPE NCC office - otherwise nothing will be done. The discussion that we participate in can last till infinity. And you should take into consideration that the office works _de facto_ the last 1,5 years, you know about it. I have to do something with the community that already gets service through RosNIIROS, either to stop it immediately (quality of service is falling due to unregulated scheme, both financial and organizational) or to move forward. Regards, Alexei Platonov
On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
How about my proposal of creating a ripe-167+ document, reviewed, revised, more solid and with more representative authorship?
Yes, I like it. I want only to mention that this is just what we decided in Moscow (only ripe-167+ was not mentioned): to establish ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It was (by me at least) though went unnoticed by the majority.
RIPE office and continue to work on documents on RIR within working group which is open to all interested parties. By the way, the working group has already prepared some documents and is ready to submit them for starting discussion.
The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including ^^^^ Would you please mind clarifying in details: who "you" (see "we" above) are?
the RIPE NCC office - otherwise nothing will be done. The discussion that we participate in can last till infinity.
Yes, "infinity" -- as long as you doesn't provide us with a) clear written definition of the planned actions and the scope of the interested community (that's what my speech on ripe-167+ is about); b) solid clarification for the consensus of community mentioned in "a)".
And you should take into consideration that the office works _de facto_ the last 1,5 years,
"RosNIIROS" != "RIPE office" so far. RIPE NCC and RosNIIROS are different organisations. RosNIIROS may (to some extend) pretend on the role of Russian National registry, that's another story.
you know about it.
No I don't know *anything* "just because" or "by default".
I have to do something with the community that already gets service through RosNIIROS,
Why do you think you *have to* do something? What's wrong with current state of affairs? Why something should be changed? Why attempts to expand the scope of RosNIIROS IR to adjucent countries? this last question is the most interesting and important for me.
either to stop it immediately (quality of service is falling due to unregulated scheme, both financial and organizational)
Ok, am I understabding correctly, that without getting a "RIPE NCC" label on the frontdoor RosNIIROS can't increase the quality of service it provides? and this is the one and only real problem? Why then? And even if "yes" and solid arguments are present (which ones?) -- what is ripe-167 all about then?
or to move forward.
Regards, Alexei Platonov
Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Andrew, sorry, but I want to make only two remarks. It seems to me, that it would be better for me to stop participating in this discussion as far as: I'm an advocate of goverment regulation; I want to form "Russian Union" in Internet etc. etc. I hope my colleagues will continue. Thus: 1) There do exists some part of RIPE community (ISPs from Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine - about 45) that is served by RosNIIROS. Let's fix that it's not interesting for me _why_ do they like such a scheme. I'm interested now only to increase the quality of service for them. Just now I cannot do it because I'd be forced to rise tariffs to have some more staff, equipment, etc. - now I just "channelize" money to RIPE NCC. The problem can be solved within existing RIPE NCC tariffs only under some status, and RIPE office is quite good. 2) The problem of RIR is much more complicated and needs further discussion. As far as you speak about ripe-167+ document, I understand that you are not rejecting this project at all. I hope you are informed that working group on this problem already exists and prepares preliminary documents (and you are welcome of course, as well as any other person interested in the problem under consideration). By the way, I'm not the member of this WG, I'm only the consultant. Some document (say, ripe-167+) will be the result of this work. As you can notice, these items follow two stages described in ripe-167. I still think that this document is reasonable as far as it reflects reality, though the argumentation is not fully adequate. It seems to me, that the above text doesn't contrdict your position or I don't understand anything. Regards, Alexei Platonov According to Andrew Stesin:
On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
How about my proposal of creating a ripe-167+ document, reviewed, revised, more solid and with more representative authorship?
Yes, I like it. I want only to mention that this is just what we decided in Moscow (only ripe-167+ was not mentioned): to establish ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It was (by me at least) though went unnoticed by the majority.
RIPE office and continue to work on documents on RIR within working group which is open to all interested parties. By the way, the working group has already prepared some documents and is ready to submit them for starting discussion.
The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including ^^^^ Would you please mind clarifying in details: who "you" (see "we" above) are?
the RIPE NCC office - otherwise nothing will be done. The discussion that we participate in can last till infinity.
Yes, "infinity" -- as long as you doesn't provide us with
a) clear written definition of the planned actions and the scope of the interested community (that's what my speech on ripe-167+ is about); b) solid clarification for the consensus of community mentioned in "a)".
And you should take into consideration that the office works _de facto_ the last 1,5 years,
"RosNIIROS" != "RIPE office" so far. RIPE NCC and RosNIIROS are different organisations. RosNIIROS may (to some extend) pretend on the role of Russian National registry, that's another story.
you know about it.
No I don't know *anything* "just because" or "by default".
I have to do something with the community that already gets service through RosNIIROS,
Why do you think you *have to* do something? What's wrong with current state of affairs? Why something should be changed? Why attempts to expand the scope of RosNIIROS IR to adjucent countries? this last question is the most interesting and important for me.
either to stop it immediately (quality of service is falling due to unregulated scheme, both financial and organizational)
Ok, am I understabding correctly, that without getting a "RIPE NCC" label on the frontdoor RosNIIROS can't increase the quality of service it provides? and this is the one and only real problem?
Why then?
And even if "yes" and solid arguments are present (which ones?) -- what is ripe-167 all about then?
or to move forward.
Regards, Alexei Platonov
Best regards, Andrew Stesin
nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
Andrew, sorry, but I want to make only two remarks. It seems to me, that it would be better for me to stop participating in this discussion as far as: I'm an advocate of goverment regulation; I want to form "Russian Union" in Internet etc. etc.
Probably you have taken my comments as an offense... please take my apologies, I just sincerely want to have all this cleared.
1) There do exists some part of RIPE community (ISPs from Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine - about 45) that is served by RosNIIROS. ^ only 1 LIR from Ukraine, though; you are serving mostly Russian territory
Let's fix that it's not interesting for me _why_ do they like such a scheme. I'm interested now only to increase the quality of service for them. Just now I cannot do it because I'd be forced to rise tariffs to have some more staff, equipment, etc. - now I just "channelize" money to RIPE NCC. The problem can be solved within existing RIPE NCC tariffs only under some status, and RIPE office is quite good.
Ok, I accept this argumentation as worth to be discussed. This is something realistic. Pity you didn't mention this argument in ripe-167.
2) The problem of RIR is much more complicated and needs further discussion. As far as you speak about ripe-167+ document, I understand that you are not rejecting this project at all.
Sure I don't and I weren't and if you recall, at Moscow meeting I was trying to add some critical parts to the decision etc. Please don't think that I just have some destructive goals "as such". But the issues we are dealing with are pretty serious, so I'd like your position to be solid and better argumented in order to be taken into account as something really creative. It wasn't solid...
I hope you are informed that working group on this problem already exists and prepares preliminary documents (and you are welcome of course, as well as any other person interested in the problem under consideration).
Yes, I'm considering this.
By the way, I'm not the member of this WG, I'm only the consultant. Some document (say, ripe-167+) will be the result of this work.
Let's wait until the new document will arrive, Ok?
As you can notice, these items follow two stages described in ripe-167. I still think that this document is reasonable as far as it reflects reality, though the argumentation is not fully adequate.
A better document is badly needed, anyway -- don't you agree?
It seems to me, that the above text doesn't contrdict your position or I don't understand anything.
We -- means you and me :) -- got some understanding, that's it. So would you mind reviewing my own answers (on your behalf) to my own questions, please?
The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including ^^^^ Would you please mind clarifying in details: who "you" (see "we" above) are?
You answer should be: "we" means the community, represented by the working group recently formed. Yes?
I have to do something with the community that already gets service through RosNIIROS,
Why do you think you *have to* do something? What's wrong with current state of affairs? Why something should be changed?
Ok, let's consider the above 3 questions answered by you already. You already have customers, you want to continue your activities and expand them, and to survive financialy, and to increase quality of service. Be it so.
Why attempts to expand the scope of RosNIIROS IR to adjucent countries? this last question is the most interesting and important for me.
And this one? am I right feeling that if you are serving a single LIR in Ukraine, you feel that the whole Ukraine should be served by you also?
Ok, am I understabding correctly, that without getting a "RIPE NCC" label on the frontdoor RosNIIROS can't increase the quality of service it provides? and this is the one and only real problem?
And this question I'd like to ask: did you consider some ways of increasing the quality of your service, other than getting a "RIPE Office" and "RIR" label, but just remaining to be RosNIIROS? Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
According to Andrew Stesin:
On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
1) There do exists some part of RIPE community (ISPs from Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine - about 45) that is served by RosNIIROS. ^ only 1 LIR from Ukraine, though; you are serving mostly Russian territory
Of course, I'm not going to make some secret from the fact that these ISP mainly represent Russia. Only one remark: some of ISPs that have signed "Memorandum" (Relcom, Sovam, ...) serve the territory of FSU.
As you can notice, these items follow two stages described in ripe-167. I still think that this document is reasonable as far as it reflects reality, though the argumentation is not fully adequate.
A better document is badly needed, anyway -- don't you agree?
Of course, but I never insisted that ripe-167 gives all details. It's just some direction to move. The only question is: if we understand that the direction is right, shall we move or we need detailed plan from the beginning to the final? The main contradiction between our positions (if I understand) is that I prefer to move immediately, step by step, even if we have no detailed plan for all path.
It seems to me, that the above text doesn't contrdict your position or I don't understand anything.
We -- means you and me :) -- got some understanding, that's it.
So would you mind reviewing my own answers (on your behalf) to my own questions, please?
The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including ^^^^ Would you please mind clarifying in details: who "you" (see "we" above) are?
You answer should be: "we" means the community, represented by the working group recently formed. Yes?
you are right
I have to do something with the community that already gets service through RosNIIROS,
Why do you think you *have to* do something? What's wrong with current state of affairs? Why something should be changed?
Ok, let's consider the above 3 questions answered by you already. You already have customers, you want to continue your activities and expand them, and to survive financialy, and to increase quality of service. Be it so.
Why attempts to expand the scope of RosNIIROS IR to adjucent countries? this last question is the most interesting and important for me.
And this one? am I right feeling that if you are serving a single LIR in Ukraine, you feel that the whole Ukraine should be served by you also?
no. You again mix things. On the first step we give the _opportunity_ to be served in RIPE NCC office for all who prefer it. As for the second step, I repeat once more - it'not clear how to do, and with large probability it's not RosNIIROS that will be the base for RIR. As it was mentioned already, the optimal scheme is RNA.
Ok, am I understabding correctly, that without getting a "RIPE NCC" label on the frontdoor RosNIIROS can't increase the quality of service it provides? and this is the one and only real problem?
And this question I'd like to ask: did you consider some ways of increasing the quality of your service, other than getting a "RIPE Office" and "RIR" label, but just remaining to be RosNIIROS?
I'm quite sure that without coordination with RIPE, both financial and organizational, it's impossible to do something reasonable.
Best regards, Andrew Stesin
nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Best regards, Alexei Platonov
HOW DO I UNSUBSCRIBE TO THIS CRAB ? Alexei Platonov wrote:
According to Andrew Stesin:
On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Alexei Platonov wrote:
1) There do exists some part of RIPE community (ISPs from Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine - about 45) that is served by RosNIIROS. ^ only 1 LIR from Ukraine, though; you are serving mostly Russian territory
Of course, I'm not going to make some secret from the fact that these ISP mainly represent Russia. Only one remark: some of ISPs that have signed "Memorandum" (Relcom, Sovam, ...) serve the territory of FSU.
As you can notice, these items follow two stages described in ripe-167. I still think that this document is reasonable as far as it reflects reality, though the argumentation is not fully adequate.
A better document is badly needed, anyway -- don't you agree?
Of course, but I never insisted that ripe-167 gives all details. It's just some direction to move. The only question is: if we understand that the direction is right, shall we move or we need detailed plan from the beginning to the final? The main contradiction between our positions (if I understand) is that I prefer to move immediately, step by step, even if we have no detailed plan for all path.
It seems to me, that the above text doesn't contrdict your position or I don't understand anything.
We -- means you and me :) -- got some understanding, that's it.
So would you mind reviewing my own answers (on your behalf) to my own questions, please?
The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including ^^^^ Would you please mind clarifying in details: who "you" (see "we" above) are?
You answer should be: "we" means the community, represented by the working group recently formed. Yes?
you are right
I have to do something with the community that already gets service through RosNIIROS,
Why do you think you *have to* do something? What's wrong with current state of affairs? Why something should be changed?
Ok, let's consider the above 3 questions answered by you already. You already have customers, you want to continue your activities and expand them, and to survive financialy, and to increase quality of service. Be it so.
Why attempts to expand the scope of RosNIIROS IR to adjucent countries? this last question is the most interesting and important for me.
And this one? am I right feeling that if you are serving a single LIR in Ukraine, you feel that the whole Ukraine should be served by you also?
no. You again mix things. On the first step we give the _opportunity_ to be served in RIPE NCC office for all who prefer it. As for the second step, I repeat once more - it'not clear how to do, and with large probability it's not RosNIIROS that will be the base for RIR. As it was mentioned already, the optimal scheme is RNA.
Ok, am I understabding correctly, that without getting a "RIPE NCC" label on the frontdoor RosNIIROS can't increase the quality of service it provides? and this is the one and only real problem?
And this question I'd like to ask: did you consider some ways of increasing the quality of your service, other than getting a "RIPE Office" and "RIR" label, but just remaining to be RosNIIROS?
I'm quite sure that without coordination with RIPE, both financial and organizational, it's impossible to do something reasonable.
Best regards, Andrew Stesin
nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Best regards, Alexei Platonov
Do you think that things will go better if you will keep them in silence and darkness?
I do not think so. I want to see more constructive discussion.
Ok. What do you want to discuss then? It had been shown clearly enough during the ongoing discussion that argumentation in RIPE-167 is weak enough even for Russia and merely inappropriate for CIS. If you want to use constructive approach then IMHO it could be done like this: 1. The process of creating the new RIR should be suspended since it's not obvious what will be created and why. 2. Another document should be issued with much more solid motivation (if you have it) and the document should clearly state how the intended process of transition would work, what region will be served, etc. 3. The new document should be discussed then. If all you've said during this discussion w.r.t. your intentions holds true, then you should clearly see this approach as advantegeous.
How about my proposal of creating a ripe-167+ document, reviewed, revised, more solid and with more representative authorship?
Yes, I like it. I want only to mention that this is just what we decided in Moscow (only ripe-167+ was not mentioned): to establish RIPE office and continue to work on documents on RIR within working
Ughh... First we create some formal organization and then let it work out, what it should do, what territory it serves,... Correct? A very nice thing and waaay professional... Oh, by the way, regarding Moscow meeting. The document adopted there indicates the whole FSU territory as the region served by RIR. It disregards what you've called the "consolidated opinion" of Ukrainian ISPs. Will your workgroup continue to disregard other's opinions? Then it's official status may result in many problems.
group which is open to all interested parties. By the way, the working group has already prepared some documents and is ready to submit them for starting discussion.
The only thing I insist: we need to begin _practical_ work, including the RIPE NCC office - otherwise nothing will be done. The discussion that we participate in can last till infinity.
The discussion surely _will_ continue to infinity if you do not have well-motivated, well-argumented proposals with clearly stated purpose and with support from the majority of LIRs situated in every country/territory you want to serve. If you cannot get support - do not include the territory. If your motivation is not accepted by the community you want to serve - you have wrong motivation. Would you like to start _practical_ work without clear understanding of the tasks you want to carry out, without clear understanding of whom do you serve and what are advantages of being served by you? If so, then the professional level of the new RIR (or RIPE NCC Office in Moscow for that matter) would seem to be... low.
And you should take into consideration that the office works _de facto_ the last 1,5 years, you know about it. I have to do something with the
Then what is wrong with it working de facto another half a year without the official status? And to finally make all the others understand your position, goals and intentions, to formalize the transition process and procedures, to ... Well, you probably got the idea.
community that already gets service through RosNIIROS, either to stop it immediately (quality of service is falling due to unregulated scheme, both financial and organizational) or to move forward.
So, in a nutshell, you want to say the following: "I am serving some 50 LIRs now for free. I want to get money for my service. Currently my service is bad but as you pay me money, it will become more appropriate. Take my word for it. Now, since I want to establish the RIR, I need to indicate the region. I'm serving several LIRs from abroad Russia, so let the region be FSU. And no, I do not have good arguments for why the RIR should be created except we need money badly to increase the level of service. But see guys - I'm honest! Take my vows for it!" Right?
Regards, Alexei Platonov
-- Igor Romanenko @..@ Office: igor@lucky.net, +380-(44)-290-03-48 (----) Home: igor@frog.kiev.ua ( | | ) http://www.lucky.net/~igor/ " " "On the Internet nobody knows you are a Frog"
Hello all, On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Igor Romanenko wrote: [...]
1. The process of creating the new RIR should be suspended since it's not obvious what will be created and why. 2. Another document should be issued with much more solid motivation (if you have it) and the document should clearly state how the intended process of transition would work, what region will be served, etc. 3. The new document should be discussed then.
That's exactly what I was proposing. Thanks to you Igor for better formal explanation.
If all you've said during this discussion w.r.t. your intentions holds true, then you should clearly see this approach as advantegeous.
Yes, this approach *is* advantageous! I beleive that the very best intentions were the only background of ripe-167; but this fact remained unclear and unexplained in details. The latter approach will allow to make everything clear, explained and obvious -- thus better probability of painless adoption of the proposal by the community. [...]
The discussion surely _will_ continue to infinity if you do not have well-motivated, well-argumented proposals with clearly stated purpose and with support from the majority of LIRs situated in every country/territory you want to serve. If you cannot get support - do not include the territory. If your motivation is not accepted by the community you want to serve - you have wrong motivation.
Yes, that's it. It would be nice to hear comments on this last paragraph of Igor's notes from other readers of the list -- I think either Igor's approach is correct here, or I have a fundamentally wrong understanding of the decision process in RIPE. Thanks in advanse.
Would you like to start _practical_ work without clear understanding of the tasks you want to carry out, without clear understanding of whom do you serve and what are advantages of being served by you? If so, then the professional level of the new RIR (or RIPE NCC Office in Moscow for that matter) would seem to be... low.
[... a question to Alexei Platonov: ...]
So, in a nutshell, you want to say the following: "I am serving some 50 LIRs now for free. I want to get money for my service. Currently my service is bad but as you pay me money, it will become more appropriate. Take my word for it. Now, since I want to establish the RIR, I need to indicate the region. I'm serving several LIRs from abroad Russia, so let the region be FSU. And no, I do not have good arguments for why the RIR should be created except we need money badly to increase the level of service. But see guys - I'm honest! Take my vows for it!"
Right?
It looks like this is pretty close to truth... comments? Best regards, Andrew Stesin nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE
Hi All!!! I don't know how it happened, that I'm receiving e-mail letters from this group (?)... Since I'm not interested in your discussion, please help me to unsubscribe... It's interesting, that I don't know how I subscribed my address to this group. Does this gropu have a moderator or some other kind of operator (admin etc.)? Thanx in advence for every help! Regards Grzegorz Jasiniak
participants (9)
-
Alexei Platonov -
Andrew Stesin -
aw＠eunet.ch -
Grzegorz Jasiniak -
Henrik Bremerskov -
Igor Romanenko -
Sergey A. Mukhin -
Sergey Gulchuck -
Vladimir Lebedev