- members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

[ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Asta S. 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

Hello, I think it is beneficial for RIPE to change the model because 2022 showed that in the long term, the current model doesn't have a future. Reserves will be exhausted or the fees per LIR account will have to be increased significantly.Also, it would be interesting to hear how this new charging scheme model would affect the current IPv4 waiting list. Now the members have to pay sign-up fees and yearly fees without receiving resources. How these members (that are still waiting in a list) will be charged after implementing this new model? And how new members applying for resources would be charged? | |

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Josh Jameson 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

Dear Members, ServeByte Limited is in favor of the new proposed pricing model 2, to abolish the current membership fee model. We find that it is a much fairer pricing model for small service providers. All of our costs have increased over the past few years, but clawing higher fees from small LIR members is unsustainable. It discourages direct RIPE membership and instead encourages people to merge their resources, under a single LIR for little to no extra cost. We have even considered this. Thank you for your time. Yours Faithfully, Josh Jameson Technical Director ServeByte Limited

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Consultation on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2024
by Daniel Suchy 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

Hello, can you provide analysis for "Model 2" describing number of LIRs in each category drafted in calculation? Can you demonstrate RIPE NCC income from membership fees based on that model you're presenting currently? I expect NCC has such numbers and shoult present them to members. - Daniel On 3/7/23 10:35, Simon Jan Haytink wrote: > Dear RIPE NCC members, > > We would like to re-open the consultation we began with the membership in 2021 on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model, and we would like to carry out that consultation well in advance of the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) May 2023. > > In 2021, we presented on this topic at the GM, and we also surveyed our members and held an open house to get direct input on the charging scheme model that members would like to see implemented by the RIPE NCC. The outcome at that stage of the consultation was that there were strong cases made for both the current one-LIR, one-fee model and for a category-based model that would charge based on the number of resources held by a member. A strong case was also made to charge for all resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC, including ASNs, and to charge a fee for transfers. > > The Executive Board decided to suspend the consultation in light of the war in Ukraine, but we are eager to decide on a way forward on this matter together with the membership. > > One of the main reasons that we would like to advance the discussion on the charging model is that we expect many members with multiple LIR accounts who received resources in 2021 to merge these accounts in the coming year. This means that the income the RIPE NCC receives will be reduced by a significant amount and we will need to ensure that our charging model allows us to collect the revenue required to maintain our operations. We believe that a category-based model would be best suited to cover this consolidation risk. Continuing with the existing model would mean that an increase in fees for all members would be required. Our ultimate goal is to arrive at a charging scheme model that will be sustainable for many years to come, meeting the needs of the RIPE NCC’s members. > > To help with discussion and to provide something tangible for members to assess, we are putting forward two draft models for members to review. These models can be summarised as: > > Model 1: A “one-LIR, one-fee” model based on the current RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2023 that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. > > Model 2: A category-based model that charges per member (not per LIR account) and is based on resources registered and that also charges for independent resources, ASNs, transfers and changes in business structure such as Mergers & Acquisitions. > > In order to allow members to form an opinion based on their own situation, we are providing an Excel sheet that will allow you to calculate the fees you would pay under each of the draft models. It is important to be aware that at this stage, the numbers assigned for each item are indicative and would be reviewed in light of the discussion with members. We plan to review these figures following consultation with the members, and giving input on those figures would greatly help to arrive at a good model. > > You can download the Excel sheet from: > https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations/me… > > We also plan to hold another Open House meeting on the Charging Scheme in March to further discuss the charging scheme models. The Executive Board will then take the input and decide on one or more charging schemes for the membership to vote on at the GM to be held on 24 May 2023. The outcome of that vote will determine the charging scheme model to be used in the coming years. > > I ask that you provide your input on this important consultation on the Membership Discussion mailing list (members-discuss(a)ripe.net) by 26 April. Input provided up to this date will be considered by the Board when formulating the charging schemes to be proposed for the GM. Input after this date is of course also welcome although it might not be reflected in the schemes put forward to the membership at the GM. > > The consultation will also be recorded and available from: > https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/member-and-community-consultations > > I look forward to your input. > > Kind regards, > > Simon Jan Haytink > Finance Director > RIPE NCC > > Summary > > 7 March: Start consultation with membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme model > 21 March: Open House to discuss charging scheme with membership > 24 March: Executive Board meeting to discuss input received so far > 12 April: Publication of Draft RIPE NCC Charging Schemes 2024 > 26 April: Publication of Final RIPE NCC Charging Schemes to be voted on by members > 24 May: RIPE NCC General Meeting May 2023 > > References > > Open House and Survey Results > https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/ripe-ncc-open-house-ch… > > Presentation at General Meeting > https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2021/documentatio… >

1 0

Board minutes regarding investigation
by Sander Steffann 24 Jan '23

24 Jan '23

Hi board, I am looking at the minutes of board meeting 163, and I have a few questions. The minutes state that "The investigation was tasked to identify whether there have been violations of the RIPE NCC Code of Conduct”. At the last AGM I asked if there was a Code of Conduct for board members, and as far as I remember there wasn’t any. So which Code of Conduct do you refer to here? If it is different from the RIPE Code of Conduct please provide either a link or the full text. Looking at the RIPE Code of Conduct, which applies to all of us in this community, it identifies some examples of positive behaviour, like accepting differing viewpoints and experiences, being considerate and showing empathy towards others, especially when disagreeing or raising issues, and giving/receiving feedback or suggestions in a positive way. It follows with "Behaviours that undermine our values are unacceptable and will not be tolerated." I have personally definitely seen behaviour contradicting the points mentioned above from the board member in question (and I have heard many others express the same) but apparently they ARE now being tolerated. Please explain this discrepancy between the Code of Conduct and the outcome of this investigation. The goals of the Code of conduct are to help everyone feel safe and included and to make everyone aware of expected behaviour. As far as I can see we have failed on both accounts here… Sincerely, Sander Steffann PS: just to make sure, who actually performed the investigation? I assume it was a completely independent party with no previous, current or future ties to the RIPE NCC, financial or otherwise. Please confirm.

7 7

Re: [members-discuss] Board minutes regarding investigation
by Terrence de Kat 20 Jan '23

20 Jan '23

Hi Sander, Yeah, maybe "neutral" isn't the best way to describe it. Let's say there's a spectrum that goes: positive > neutral > negative but tolerable > intolerable/unacceptable (undermines values) Where only the worst category would be actionable. For your "death by a thousand cuts principle", that could in certain cases be harassment that would be actionable (eg when repeatedly directed at the same person), and the CoC explicitly leaves room for this by specifying the list is non-exhaustive. However, this is well into subjective territory. Some people have a natural communication style that's abrasive (it's been said about me). Someone may experience this as negative communication, while others may describe it as direct and therefore actually positive (I myself prefer to interpret it like this if possible). Besides that, life in general isn't only positive, so to communicate effectively negative communication is a necessary tool in the toolbox. Negative doesn't equal bad. So, we shouldn't want negative communication chilled by subjecting it to process just because it's negative. Personally I'd err on the side of not interfering in communication unless it's clearly malicious as the examples in the CoC. Having said that, I don't actually know what communication by the board member you're referring to, so I don't mean to defend that specifically. Though, it seems the investigator came to the conclusion that it didn't rise to the intolerable/unacceptable level. But that doesn't mean it's positive in any way. -- Regards, Terrence de Kat, PhD/MTh/BPsy Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. Please quote relevant replies. From: Sander Steffann <sander(a)steffann.nl> Sent: Wednesday, 18 January 2023 15:38 To: Terrence de Kat Cc: <members-discuss(a)ripe.net>; Christian Kaufmann Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Board minutes regarding investigation > Hi Terrence, > > > So, there exists a (very wide) range of communication that doesn't align with the given "examples of positive behavior", nor with the given "examples [of behaviours that undermine our values]". Let's call this "neutral" communication. > > Hmmm. I see your point. I feel it’s a given that behaviour that is totally opposite to "positive behaviour" is automatically “bad behaviour”, so I wouldn’t call that “neutral”. > > My feeling is that there is a gap between “bad behaviour that warrants immediate consequences” and “bad behaviour that is just annoying by itself, but should warrant consequences if it becomes a pattern”. The death by a thousand cuts principle. The consequences for the victim are no less in the latter case, but it is much harder to determine which little cut was the one that crossed the line. > > How to protect victims from both behaviours, sadly I do know know :( > > Cheers, > Sander >

3 2

Re: [members-discuss] Board minutes regarding investigation
by Terrence de Kat 18 Jan '23

18 Jan '23

Hi Sander, While reading your email I noticed that you may be making an error in interpreting the CoC, or at least leaving it ambiguous as to what you mean. You reproduce the "examples of positive behaviour" and the following statement that "Behaviours that undermine our values are unacceptable and will not be tolerated". Next you refer to "the points mentioned above", which creates the impression that you believe communication that does not align with the given "examples of positive behavior" is also communication that "undermine[s] our values" and therefore breaches the CoC. I don't think that follows from the CoC as what follows the statement that "Behaviours that undermine our values are unacceptable and will not be tolerated" is "Below are some examples [of behaviours that undermine our values]". So, there exists a (very wide) range of communication that doesn't align with the given "examples of positive behavior", nor with the given "examples [of behaviours that undermine our values]". Let's call this "neutral" communication. This may explain the discrepancy you complain about. If I have interpreted your message incorrectly I apologize but suggest you clarify. -- Regards, Terrence de Kat, PhD/MTh/BPsy Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V. Please quote relevant replies. From: Sander Steffann <sander(a)steffann.nl> Sent: Wednesday, 18 January 2023 14:08 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; exec-board(a)ripe.net Subject: [members-discuss] Board minutes regarding investigation > Hi board, > > I am looking at the minutes of board meeting 163, and I have a few questions. > > The minutes state that "The investigation was tasked to identify whether there have been violations of the RIPE NCC Code of Conduct”. At the last AGM I asked if there was a Code of Conduct for board members, and as far as I remember there wasn’t any. So which Code of Conduct do you refer to here? If it is different from the RIPE Code of Conduct please provide either a link or the full text. > > Looking at the RIPE Code of Conduct, which applies to all of us in this community, it identifies some examples of positive behaviour, like accepting differing viewpoints and experiences, being considerate and showing empathy towards others, especially when disagreeing or raising issues, and giving/receiving feedback or suggestions in a positive way. It follows with "Behaviours that undermine our values are unacceptable and will not be tolerated." > > I have personally definitely seen behaviour contradicting the points mentioned above from the board member in question (and I have heard many others express the same) but apparently they ARE now being tolerated. Please explain this discrepancy between the Code of Conduct and the outcome of this investigation. > > The goals of the Code of conduct are to help everyone feel safe and included and to make everyone aware of expected behaviour. As far as I can see we have failed on both accounts here… > > Sincerely, > Sander Steffann > > PS: just to make sure, who actually performed the investigation? I assume it was a completely independent party with no previous, current or future ties to the RIPE NCC, financial or otherwise. Please confirm. > > > _______________________________________________ > members-discuss mailing list > members-discuss(a)ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/terrence%40darkness-…

2 1

RIPE NCC Quarterly Planning Q1 2023
by Fergal Cunningham 03 Jan '23

03 Jan '23

Dear RIPE NCC members, We have now published our Q1 2023 plans for our development teams. These are available at: https://www.ripe.net/support/documentation/quarterly-planning <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 Previously, any work items related to information security, risk and compliance were included in the Information Technology area. As the Information Security, Risk, and Compliance area keeps developing, we split the work items and created a separate area for them that can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/support/documentation/quarterly-planning/information-s… The goals of publishing our planning are to be transparent about the work we will be carrying out in the coming months, to get your input on those plans, and to foster a dialogue with our members and the community about what you would like to see the RIPE NCC work on going forward. If you have any input on our plans or want to let us know what you would like to see us work on, please let us know. Kind regards, and best wishes for the new year. Fergal Cunningham Head of Membership Engagement RIPE NCC

1 0

Transfers from Ukraine
by Leonid Khorolets 07 Nov '22

07 Nov '22

We are against the initiative to ban all the transfers of IP addresses from Ukraine! We want to have this source of funds to keep our network running and pay salaries! Please note, there are NO CONSENSUS about transfer block in Ukrainian community, and those people on the meeting does not represent a majority of Ukrainian LIRs, they represent only themselves.

8 9

Re: [members-discuss] [ripe-list] A frank discussion
by Lu Heng 03 Nov '22

03 Nov '22

Hi Nabeel: The letter was published on 12th July(signed by APNIC Paul Wilson, LACNIC Oscar Robles, ARIN John Curran RIPE Hans Peter Hollen): https://www.nro.net/nro-letter-to-mauritius-government/ In the letter, NRO request to make RIR "international organisation" to achieve "better outcome". on September 8th, the Mauritius government rejected a request from AFRINIC to become an "international organization" https://www.nrs.help/post/is-afrinic-going-to-become-a-specialized-agency-o… (official statement is at the bottom of this post) In its rejection letter, the Mauritius government mentioned that AFRINIC's request was 1. made on 7th March 2022 2. Based on the "international organisations and conferences (privileges and immunities) act". With regards to the second reason, here's more information: According to the "international organisations and conferences (privileges and immunities) act" (link below), International organization means "specialized agency of the United Nations", and ITU is a "specialized agency of the United Nations". https://attorneygeneral.govmu.org/Documents/Laws%20of%20Mauritius/A-Z%20Act… Lu Heng Chief Executive Officer LARUS Limited Email H.Lu@LARUS.netmailto:a.yan@outsideheaven.com Office tel:+852+29888918 Address A3, 11/F, TML Tower, Tsuen Wan, N.T, Hong Kong SAR Website: LARUS.net This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. ---- On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 14:49:36 +0800 NABEEL YASIN MOHAMMED AMIN <nabeelyasin(a)hotmail.com> wrote --- Hi Lu This is really strange request , so what was the justification or excuse for this letter. Regards Nabeel Yasin From: Lu Heng <mailto:h.lu@larus.net> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 1:08 PM To: NABEEL YASIN MOHAMMED AMIN <mailto:nabeelyasin@hotmail.com> Cc: Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl>; Randy Bush <mailto:randy@psg.com>; ripe-list <mailto:ripe-list@ripe.net>; members-discuss <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [ripe-list] [members-discuss] A frank discussion Hi Nabeel: The NRO send a letter to mauritus goverment request to be specialized agency of United nation and get immunity for RIR leadership without community knowledge, that is issue we discuss here. Lu Heng Chief Executive Officer LARUS Limited Email mailto:H.Lu@LARUS.netmailto:a.yan@outsideheaven.com Office tel:+852+29888918 Address A3, 11/F, TML Tower, Tsuen Wan, N.T, Hong Kong SAR Website: LARUS.net This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. ---- On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:56 +0800 mailto:nabeelyasin@hotmail.com<mailto:nabeelyasin@hotmail.com> wrote ---- Dear All Is there any a proposal or any political influences that RIR should be controlled by the ITU qor any other intergovernmental agency , or what exactly is being discussed over here ?! Thank you and best regards Nabeel Yasin WhatsApp/Tel : +967 777006885 From: ripe-list <mailto:ripe-list-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Lu Heng <mailto:h.lu@larus.net> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 12:11 PM To: Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Randy Bush <mailto:randy@psg.com>; ripe-list <mailto:ripe-list@ripe.net>; members-discuss <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [ripe-list] [members-discuss] A frank discussion Hi sander: Sending letter request to be specialized agency of United nation is “work with” government? If being specialized agency of United nation is not controlled by inter governmental body I don’t know what is. No, I am not confused here, you probably(intentionally) are. Lu Heng Chief Executive Officer LARUS Limited Email mailto:H.Lu@LARUS.netmailto:a.yan@outsideheaven.com Office tel:+852+29888918 Address A3, 11/F, TML Tower, Tsuen Wan, N.T, Hong Kong SAR Website: LARUS.net This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. ---- On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:08:02 +0800 Sander Steffann<mailto:sander@steffann.nl> wrote ---- Hi Lu, So you do support RIR to be ITU and controlled by UN You seem to (intentionally?) confuse “work together with” and “being controlled by”. Please don’t. Cheers, Sander

3 5

A frank discussion
by Lu Heng 28 Oct '22

28 Oct '22

Dear RIPE community and RIPE NCC members: You may be well aware of RIPE NCC management's refusal to acknowledge the serious governance issue in AFRINIC and the fact that the management keeps involving itself closely with governmental bodies, ever since the miscarriage of their NRO letter to make AFRINIC a specialized agency of United Nations. Recently, during the ITU Conference, it is said that the RIPE NCC management team seemed to have approached the American government and European Union government as a means to interfere with the ongoing matters. As someone who has had engaged closely with the community for many years, I believe it is of utmost importance for the community to be aware of the seriousness of the matter, and a frank discussion is more than necessary in the upcoming RIPE meeting. For RIPE NCC to make their case of seems deep interference with government and for me to exchange with the community any views and differences. My dispute with AFRINIC (despite it is sub-judice), is essentially a "policy dispute" between members of RIR and the RIR management. Court pocceding is also part of bottom up community driven process when the dispute can not be resolved amicably. However, NRO's request to make RIR an ITU-like body, and RIPE NCC's apparent consistent engagement with government officials to interfere in the matter, I think it is high time for the community to be aware of, discuss and decide whether such involvement is proper in a community driven, bottom-up registry who has been independent of governmental influences for more than three decades I have submitted an lighting talk for the plenary and got rejected. I have attached the rejection letter here for your perusal. It is disconcerting to me because the matter is of utmost urgency and importance for the community and the RIR system. The purpose of the current letter is to re-state my intention of an open, frank, heart-to-heart discussion with the community. I will appreciate if any working group chair can pick up the subject and do an BoF during the working group sessions. I believe the graveness of the issue requires such a discussion - transparency and accountability are the two core values of this community. Here is the letter I received: Dear Lu Heng, We regret to inform you that your Lightning Talk submission for RIPE 85 titled 'A difficult reality' has not been accepted into the Plenary session. >From the PC's perspective the presentation does not fit the RIPE plenary. If your submission refers to the role of the RIPE NCC, then we suggest the NCC Services WG as the appropriate venue to start this discussion. If you want to have a discussion about the RIPE community as a policy making body, then we feel the RIPE community plenary is the right place to go. Thank you, Franziska Lichtblau on behalf of the Programme Committee My reply: Hi The presentation is about ripe community’s view on current actions taken by NRO and RIPE NCC. The matter is extremely serious and I believe ripe community should be aware. And yes, this is about where boundaries of ripe community policy making and how many people should be aware and participate community. I feel current ripe community is not truly inclusive enough for every internet user aware. I think best we have a frank discussion and inform the community, rather have me go to some channels of communication, and community might feel not informed and asking why. And THIS IS REALLY NOT ABOUT NCC SERVICE. If PC have future questions welcome to send me zoom link to discuss. Lu Heng Chief Executive Officer LARUS Limited Email H.Lu@LARUS.netmailto:a.yan@outsideheaven.com Office tel:+852+29888918 Address A3, 11/F, TML Tower, Tsuen Wan, N.T, Hong Kong SAR Website: LARUS.net This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

9 19