- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

RIPE NCC Quarterly Planning Q3 2023
by Fergal Cunningham 29 Jun '23

29 Jun '23

Dear members, We have published our Q3 2023 plans for our development teams. These are available at: https://www.ripe.net/support/documentation/quarterly-planning Our quarterly planning includes the work we will be carrying out in the next few months in: - RPKI - Learning & Development - RIPE Database - Business Applications, including the LIR Portal, Registry Services and other applications - DNS and K-root - RIPE Atlas - RIPEstat - RIS - Information Technology - Information Security, Risk and Compliance By publishing our plans each quarter, we aim to be transparent about the work items we will be carrying out and start a dialogue on other activities you would like to see the RIPE NCC to focus on moving forward. If you have any input on these plans or suggestions for future work, please reach out to us. And there is still time to give your input on our services in the RIPE NCC Survey 2023 if you have yet to do so: https://www.ripe.net/survey Kind regards, Fergal Cunningham Head of Membership Engagement RIPE NCC

1 0

[news] RIPE NCC Certified Professionals is Back Online
by Thomas Schweizer-Bolzonello 06 Jun '23

06 Jun '23

Hello, I am reacting to the recent news email about RIPE NCC training/certifications. I wish to know who at RIPE thought it was the best choice to select such a company engaged in multiple lawsuits to proctor the RIPE exams? Am I the only one concerned about this, weren't there other more appropriate solutions to keep the RIPE certification exams appropriately monitored for fair play and fair examinations? [1] https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/11/06/0011221/proctoring-software-compan… [2] https://twitter.com/ejohnson99/status/1303121786637373443 Best regards, Thomas ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Alvaro Vives <avives(a)ripe.net> Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 at 17:35 Subject: [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Certified Professionals is Back Online To: <ncc-announce(a)ripe.net> Dear colleagues, I’m very pleased to report that RIPE NCC Certified Professionals is back online! We took a hiatus for a few weeks to transition to a new exam platform. I would also like to thank all the RIPE community members who helped us test this new system, for not only taking the exam but also for sharing your feedback with us. Here are some of the biggest changes that we’ve made: - You no longer need to schedule exams in advance - you can take an exam on demand. - We now use the services of Better Examinations, a Europe-based exam provider. - Exams are no longer “live proctored” but use a record and review system instead. This system uses Proctorio, and it’s important to note that the exam recordings are accessible only to select RIPE NCC staff, and for a limited duration. Test takers are also no longer obliged to scan the room before taking exams. - You are no longer obliged to use government-issued identification cards to register for the exam - any photo ID will do. We look for a match between the name and photo on the ID document with the test taker. - We can introduce more interactive questions in the exams, as the new platform offers greater flexibility. - There are no longer any geographic restrictions on accessing the exam platform. We’ve published a more detailed article on RIPE Labs on what these changes involve: https://labs.ripe.net/author/william-johnson/get-certified-20-introducing-t… For those of you who have been waiting to get certified, I invite you to claim your vouchers and try out our new exam system. Your new vouchers for 2023 are now available and valid until the end of this year! https://getcertified.ripe.net/ Best of luck to those of you who have scheduled exams at RIPE 86, or who plan to take exams soon (and yes we have t-shirts if you get certified). Kind regards, Alvaro Vives Team Manager Learning and Development

5 5

AGM resolution 3 vote result numbers
by Martin Millnert 31 May '23

31 May '23

Dear NCC, please at your convenience publish the vote results numbers of the third resolution of the AGM 2023. Thanks in advance! Best regards, -- Martin Millnert BrainMill AB

2 2

Response to Comments on the Charging Scheme Proposals
by Simon-Jan Haytink 30 May '23

30 May '23

Dear all, I’d like to answer the comments and questions that have been raised since the Board Treasurer announced the final proposed charging scheme options. See Raymond’s mail announcing the options at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/2023-April/001645.html Also see my colleague Fergal’s mail explaining the instant run-off voting method and how it will work with the charging scheme vote: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/2023-May/001647.html Purpose of the Charging Scheme and Budget The charging scheme is the mechanism the RIPE NCC uses to ensure it collects sufficient funds to carry out its promises to the members in future years. As a safeguard, any excess (or shortage) of funds is subject to a redistribution vote by the General Meeting. This redistribution has happened many times in the past. This ensures that the RIPE NCC operates on a cost-recovery basis, or in other words operates as a not-for-profit. The Charging Scheme does not define the cost budget of the RIPE NCC, but of course there is a relation between the two. The projected income does at the very least provide direction regarding discussion on the Activity Plan and Budget. The Activity Plan and Budget defines the planned activities and associated costs for a financial year. And for the longer term, we have developed a five-year strategy. Both of these documents are published for the members to provide input on, and they are then approved by the RIPE NCC Executive Board. The Draft Activity Plan and Budget is published on a yearly basis every autumn, specifically to consult with our membership. Additionally, this year there is the option to provide input and feedback via the RIPE NCC Survey 2023, which will launch next week. The Activity Plan and Budget is effectively the RIPE NCC’s promise to its members in terms of what it will do and how much it will spend in the coming year. The most recently approved Activity Plan and Budget (in this case 2023) forms the basis for projections of the required income for the following financial year, as this is the most recent approved “promise to our members”. All charging scheme projections are made with this promise in mind, to ensure sufficient income to continue that promise. If the Activity Plan and Budget 2024 requires us to cut or add activities or costs, then that is what we will do to fulfill our promise. That being said, efficient and effective use of membership funds is a priority and will remain a priority of the Executive Board and the management of the RIPE NCC. Why Change the Current Model? We need to ensure sufficient and sustainable income to continue our operations in a stable and predictable manner. The high market value of IPv4 resources combined with the possibility of multiple LIR accounts per member has created uncertainty and unpredictability for a significant part of our income. A member-based model rather than an LIR account model will help to reduce this uncertainty by removing the LIR account as the basis for the charging scheme. We are also addressing the stated unfairness in the current model. Although some members have expressed the desire for increased differentiation, we see the proposed change as a significant difference from the current one LIR-one fee model. It allows us to spread the funding burden differently because in the current model, all members with one LIR account pay the same fee (exception is the independent resources). Due to a significant inflow of New LIRs in 2019 and 2021, there is a considerable amount of members who hold more than one LIR account, and these members do pay additional LIR account fees. One of the major benefits of the category model is that it charges per member, and with that it reduces the uncertainty caused by multiple LIRs and the associated consolidation risk. We aim to achieve a clearer distinction between RIPE Policy and the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme by removing the LIR account as the basis of the charging scheme. And we want to ensure that the RIPE NCC together with its members is ready for any change the future might bring, by increasing the possibilities the charging scheme provides to adapt for this change. Of course, this can only happen with formal approval by the GM. The Category Model Under this model, the categories would apply as soon as a member holds IPv4 or IPv6 resources as defined in the charging scheme document. Limits as defined in the charging scheme document are the upper limits of the categories. The lower limit for Category 1 is one resource (one IPv4 address or one IPv6 address). The base category applies to all, including members with no IPv4 or IPv6 resources. We have been asked why there is not a per-IPv4 address model, with comments that the category model favours bigger members. In a way, it does, but less so than in the one-LIR account, one-fee model. We also need to stay true to the fact that we are a membership association, so while we can differentiate between members, this needs to stay within reason. Additionally, we need to ensure the independence of the RIPE NCC by not becoming too dependent on a small subset of our membership for a significant part of our income. Furthermore, protecting the one member-one vote principle could become significantly more difficult if the contribution differences become extreme. So we can facilitate differentiation between members in size of contribution, especially compared to the current model we have, but it is essential that this stays within reason. One clear benefit of the category model is that we can refine it over time, working towards a model that is acceptable for more members. On the pricing and category limits, they have been set with the latest Activity Plan and Budget in mind, to ensure at the very least that we can continue with our promise to members in 2024. If the Activity Plan and Budget 2024 requires the RIPE NCC to reduce or add activities or costs, we will act accordingly. Regarding the options presented for voting, our initial plan was to submit two charging schemes for a vote, to provide a clear choice to the members on a category-based model or the current model. Both of these models would provide income at the level of the 2023 budget if we apply a correction for expected inflation of 5%, resulting in a projected income of EUR 42 million. After feedback from members we wanted to ensure the GM could vote for “NO CHANGE” which is represented in Option D. Additionally to this “NO CHANGE” vote, I personally requested to add a vote to keep the income (before any correction for inflation) at the same level as in 2023, which is the reason Option C has been added. The 2nd or 3rd vote on charging for ASN assignments and/or transfers would (if approved) provide additional income over that provided by the charging scheme voted for by members. The Waiting List The current situation regarding the IPv4 waiting list and costs associated with a /24 IPv4 allocation is in our eyes an undesirable one. With the uncertainty of the waiting period (around 1.5 to 2 years) which can be shorter or longer, plus the two-year “non-transfer” policy, it means unpredictable costs for our members and income that is not transparent for the RIPE NCC. - Two-year waiting period = sign-up fee plus two years LIR service fee = 4,100 EUR - Two-year “non-transfer” policy = two years LIR service fee = 3,100 EUR - Indicative price 7,200 EUR To address this, we propose a one-time join-the-waiting list fee, and a to-be-determined /24 IPv4 allocation fee. This would replace costs that apply to members based on being on the waiting list for a long time without receiving resources, as members would be charged the waiting list fee upon placement on the waiting list, and the allocation fee only just before resources are allocated (with the opportunity to reject the resources). This is, in our opinion, a fairer way to charge for these resources. To define this charge and work out any possible issues with RIPE Policy, we are postponing this vote to allow for consultation with the membership because this to-be-determined fee will have an effect on who applies for the resources. We also need to consider fees already paid by LIR accounts, and whether a discount would be in order for fees already paid in relation to specific IPv4 allocations. And for this, time is needed to consult with membership. Additionally, this fee will also result in additional income for the RIPE NCC, which will be subject to a redistribution vote, assuming this provides excess funds. See the original announcement on the waiting list freeze: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/2023-April/001643.html Finally, there are probably more questions and comments than I have answered here. But we are preparing for the General Meeting (GM) next week where there will be several presentations from our side on the charging and budgeting of the RIPE NCC. Our Managing Director will present at both the NCC Services Working Group on the past and future of the RIPE NCC, and he will present a more detailed presentation on budget developments in the GM. I will also present on the Charging Scheme options as well as give an update on our current financial situation. I hope you will register to join and follow these presentations, and you will have the opportunity to further ask questions and discuss the various options to vote on. https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2023 Kind regards, Simon-Jan Haytink Chief Financial Officer RIPE NCC

6 9

Not enough t-shirt in ripe 86
by Lu Heng 30 May '23

30 May '23

Hi A simple suggestion, can we make t-shirt available to pick up at registration instead of set time frame on tuesday? then no need to have t-shirt pick up card, also everyone can get one. I am collecting all the t-shirt from all ripe meetings and it is rather pity to miss one due to business meeting. I asked staff later and they say all t-shirt is gone -- -- Kind regards. Lu

1 0

RIPE NCC Charging Scheme - revolutionary approach
by J Pawlus 25 May '23

25 May '23

Hello, I know that it is not for this GM meeting but let us consider different approach to the charging scheme. IPv4 is dead and any charging scheme based on IPv4 will only extends its agony. The new model should be based on IPv6 with highest price being paid by LIR without IPv6 implemented to some extent. The criteria could be: - allocation of IPv6 space from RIPE - announcement of IPv6 prefix - DNS and revDNS implemented - assignement of IPv6 addresses to some End Users - accessibility of LIR Web Page via IPv6 This approach will clearly increase the speed of IPv6 popularity. Technically, it has been (or is being) done by RIPE to check maturity of a LIR with IPv6. This will also have an impact on LIR End Users if they are told that they could pay more if they did not move to IPv6. At the the end some thoughts on current category Model - the ratio of an price increase/decrease for highest and lowest category is certainly not a small step or evolutionary change for LIRs in high categories - All IPv4 allocations has been done with RIPE approval in accordance to relevant polices at that time. - Most IPv4 allocations has been done in times when such thing as NAT did not exist. Best regards, Jerzy Pawlus P.S. Any statements contained in this email are personal to the author

4 3

Re: [members-discuss] [news] RIPE NCC Certified Professionals is Back Online
by Jochen Bern 25 May '23

25 May '23

On 25.05.23 16:45, Andreas Grabmüller | QuarIT GmbH wrote: > I’ve got a question about this (as I honestly don’t know). Do people > care about “secure”? [...] is RIPE a school that offers some state > approved certificates or something? If not, why do we need tests at > all and especially some testing methology that can be so privacy > invasive? > > I think it benefits us all to offer learning opportunities to everyone > (not just members) [...] While I need to do a RIPE SSO login to take a *course*, the RIPE Academy apparently doesn't care much who (else) might be sitting in front of the monitor etc., so the *learning* part is rather free of security concerns. The proctoring comes into play when you're taking an *exam*, and I suppose that some employer looking at the certifications, selecting job applicants based on them, deciding about pay raises according to them, etc. is enough of a possibility as to *not* simply throw the process to a low-security approach. Of course, "securing" exams again addresses several, somewhat disparate definitions of "security". As an example, you want to ascertain both that the examinee / certified-professional-to-be is who he claims he is, and that he does not have a committee of experts sitting in the next room in front of a second monitor and holding quickly-scribbled cheat sheets up to some window. The former is currently done by having the examinee wave a gvt. ID in front of the camera, and the proctor trying to tell real video footage from a deepfake with a manipulated ID pasted in - and *could* instead be done by actual *online* mechanisms, like the eID functions in my German ID card. The latter form of cheating, on the other hand, would be rather difficult to detect in any way *other* than by keeping a close eye on the video throughout the exam. (I actually asked whether use of EU's eIDAS or somesuch is in the plans, and was told that RIPE's focus is on offering equal opportunities across its *entire* service area, so no.) Kind regards, -- Jochen Bern Systemingenieur Binect GmbH

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] Voting for RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Skyline Telecom 25 May '23

25 May '23

The voting procedure is “instant run-off” which clearly benefits what RIPE wants – Charging scheme A. The other 3 options will cancel themselves out, none of them having any chance to gain close to 50% and with the redistribution, the most voted option has a clear advantage from the start. RIPE has on their website a nice video that shows exactly how it’s done and how basically Charging scheme A will win – because they intentionally made it this way so that the other three options are basically lost in the votes - https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2023/how-to-vote The only way I see in which Charging scheme A will NOT pass, is by choosing option 4 on it when voting by as many people as possible. Silviu From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>> On Behalf Of Q Misell via members-discuss Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2023 15:05 To: J Pawlus <Jerzy.Pawlus(a)cyf-kr.edu.pl<mailto:Jerzy.Pawlus@cyf-kr.edu.pl>> Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Voting for RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Hi, It is my understanding that the voting will take the form of STV (Single Transferable Vote), which will not cause your mentioned problem. Thanks, Q [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a/AGNmyxbpJnlf2vclhNhOy6wcU6-VdyRT0K8tmun…] Q Director +44 33 33 408690 [https://as207960.net/assets/img/logo2.png]<https://e.as207960.net/w4bdyj/TkxwHvOq>[https://images.credly.com/images/9f87f9ae-1875-4009-a8e6-ffe4aefea52d/image…] ________________________________ Any statements contained in this email are personal to the author and are not necessarily the statements of the company unless specifically stated. AS207960 Cyfyngedig, having a registered office at 13 Pen-y-lan Terrace, Caerdydd, Cymru, CF23 9EU, trading as Glauca Digital, is a company registered in Wales under № 12417574<https://e.as207960.net/w4bdyj/SFhtfOwI>, LEI 875500FXNCJPAPF3PD10. ICO register №: ZA782876<https://e.as207960.net/w4bdyj/u7mtgS8G>. UK VAT №: GB378323867. EU VAT №: EU372013983. Turkish VAT №: 0861333524. South Korean VAT №: 522-80-03080. Glauca Digital and the Glauca logo are registered trademarks in the UK, under № UK00003718474 and № UK00003718468, respectively. On Tue, 23 May 2023 at 13:06, J Pawlus <Jerzy.Pawlus(a)cyf-kr.edu.pl<mailto:Jerzy.Pawlus@cyf-kr.edu.pl>> wrote: Hello, Voting for RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 seems unfair. The voting should be two stage. In the first stage there should be two options: Stage 1: Option 1: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 based on category model (Option A) Option 2: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 based on non-category model (Option B,C,D) Stage 2: This stage should be taken into account if Option 2 wins. Option B: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Model B.” Option C: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Model C.” Option D: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Model D.” Otherwise all LIR interested in not winning option A should choose to vote for one of the options B,C or D (for example B) Best regards, Jerzy Pawlus ACK Cyfronet AGH _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss<https://e.as207960.net/w4bdyj/LFHjLbyK>

10 14

Voting for RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by J Pawlus 23 May '23

23 May '23

Hello, Voting for RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 seems unfair. The voting should be two stage. In the first stage there should be two options: Stage 1: Option 1: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 based on category model (Option A) Option 2: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 based on non-category model (Option B,C,D) Stage 2: This stage should be taken into account if Option 2 wins. Option B: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Model B.” Option C: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Model C.” Option D: “The General Meeting adopts the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024 Model D.” Otherwise all LIR interested in not winning option A should choose to vote for one of the options B,C or D (for example B) Best regards, Jerzy Pawlus ACK Cyfronet AGH

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [GM] Requirements and Expectations for Board Members and Candidates
by Erik Bais 17 May '23

17 May '23

Dear Ondrej, Thank you for this email on ncc-announce and from what I've read in the minutes of the EB, this has become quite a controversial topic within the EB already.. This shows in the minutes where it states : ( https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-ex… <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-ex…> point 7.3 ) > 7.3 EB candidates assessment > During EB#163, the Board asked the Managing Director to investigate mechanisms for the assessment of Executive Board candidates before an election. > Remco van Mook left the meeting room during the discussion of this item. He requested that it be noted in the minutes that it was inappropriate for the Board to discuss this topic. I can only guess on the actual reason for Remco to leave the room as this was brought to the table .. Could you express why the board decided to continue to discus the topic with an incomplete board, where putting this on the agenda was clearly upsetting one of the board members ? Was this because of the actual content of the proposal brought to the table by the MD (as he was tasked by preparing the topic as requested ) The topic by itself was requested by the EB, so it shouldn't have been such a controversial topic that an EB member should feel that it couldn't be discussed as is.. and needed to step out. I don't remember reading other EB meeting minutes where an EB member felt the need to step outside ... Was the proposal overreach by the MD, where the feedback / emotions after the investigation, which led to this topic, ( see https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2022/minutes-163rd-ex… <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2022/minutes-163rd-ex…> point 13 and 14 ) weight to heavy on the actual deliverable that was put forward to the EB. And if so, why did the EB not corrected the MD on the work or handling, before discussing it further ? From what I see in the email that you send today, the proposal is looking to exclude WG Chairs (active members of the RIPE community) to not run for the EB... While these are some of the most active members of the community. Another suggestion from what I see is to limit the amount of people from the same country.. We've had Falk & CK (German) in the Board, Job, Remco & Raymond ( Dutch ), although Raymond has been living in Finland for years. Or are we talking about where they are residing .. in that case Salam (former EB member and running candidate) is residing in The Netherlands, so is Job & Remco ... Personally I would find it discriminating, if a good candidate would be disqualified, just by its country of origin, because someone in the EB happens to be already from the same country. (by birth or where he/she resides. ) Also removing the pool of WG Chairs is something I would be strongly against ... A lot of current / former board members have been WG Chairs .. They have the faith of the community, they know the community and that is why they get elected for the EB position ... By putting this apparently controversial topic in the EB now forward to the community, my question is, is the EB managing this topic sufficiently and the MD on the work on it .. before requesting a community about an (in my few) flawed proposal ? Regards, Erik Bais On 12/05/2023, 10:44, "ncc-announce on behalf of Ondřej Filip" <ncc-announce-bounces(a)ripe.net <mailto:ncc-announce-bounces@ripe.net> <mailto:ncc-announce-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:ncc-announce-bounces@ripe.net>> on behalf of exec-board-announce(a)ripe.net <mailto:exec-board-announce@ripe.net> <mailto:exec-board-announce@ripe.net <mailto:exec-board-announce@ripe.net>>> wrote: Dear all, This week, you will have seen an invitation to join the Executive Board at an Open House on Requirements and Expectations of Board Members and Candidates. I want to provide some context on why we are having this meeting and how your input can help the Board. There are several reasons why we feel that now is the right time to discuss the expectations that the RIPE NCC membership has of its Executive Board members, not least the fact that we are responsible for the good governance of the RIPE NCC. And while the members will always elect the Board, we want to look closely at the formal requirements for Board members to make sure those elected will be able to carry out the role effectively and play their part in the good governance of the RIPE NCC. We recently strengthened the processes around board candidacy by making amendments to the Articles of Association, which were approved by the membership. But we have seen recently in other RIR regions that there have been concerns raised about candidates for executive boards. This has made us pay extra attention to our own processes around board candidacy and membership. The responsibilities of the Board are also much greater now than they were five, ten or 20 years ago. The Board has oversight of an organisation that manages important and valuable resources for 20,000 members. It must deal with highly complex issues such as the impact of war and sanctions on the membership and the Internet, as well as ensure that service delivery is provided effectively and fairly across an incredibly diverse service region. Financial oversight is a big part of our governance, as demonstrated by the recent discussions about the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme. And we are also effectively responsible for the well-being of all the excellent staff who work hard to meet your needs. To add to this, an independent investigation was carried out into allegations of bullying and harassment of a RIPE NCC staff member by a Board member. The investigation found no evidence of a breach of the RIPE NCC Code of Conduct and the Board will respect the findings of that investigation. But this did force us to look at our current structures and ask ourselves how we could handle such a situation should something similar arise again, and whether having new requirements or restrictions in place would help. At our Board meeting in March, we discussed these issues and focused on whether there should be any new requirements, restrictions or expectations for those who sit on the Executive Board. The discussion covered many areas, including whether there should be restrictions on having more than one Board member from the same organisation or country, and whether it’s appropriate for Board members to sit on the boards of other Internet organisations. This discussion is noted in the minutes from our recent board meeting: https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-ex… <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-ex…> <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-ex…> <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-ex…> Although we had a good discussion on these issues, we did feel it would be better to consult directly with the membership about these topics. Following this discussion, the Board could then propose changes to the Articles of Association affecting the make-up of the Board. Such changes would have to be voted on by the membership. At this stage, what we are looking for is your input and your ideas to help make sure that the Board of the RIPE NCC is set up to effectively represent your interests. So I ask you to please register for the Open House where we will present slides with topics for discussion and then open the floor for members’ input. https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-re… <https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-re…> <https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-re…> <https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-re…> Best regards, Ondřej Filip RIPE NCC Executive Board Chair RIPE NCC Executive Board - Functions and Expectations: https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/ripe-ncc-executive-board-func… <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/ripe-ncc-executive-board-func…> <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/ripe-ncc-executive-board-func…> <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/ripe-ncc-executive-board-func…> Executive Board Liability: https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/executive-board-liability <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/executive-board-liability> <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/executive-board-liability> <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/executive-board-liability>> Current Call for Executive Board Candidates: https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2023/announcement… <https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2023/announcement…> <https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2023/announcement…> <https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2023/announcement…>

5 4