Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ?
Dear members, I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-). TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A'). ... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org). I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass. My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it? 2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change? I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members. For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications. I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead ! Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore
I feel the same. Where all resources are transferable, RIPE NCC should allow a simple LIR name change with no more documentation than a LIR-to-LIR transfer. Or maybe require some link between old and new legal structures, but not the current strict requirements. A too strict procedure discourages people from updating their LIR details, which goes against what should be one of our primary goals: keeping the RIPE database up-to-date and accurate. -- Sébastien Brossier
Hello, Thanks Sebastien for your support, Le lundi 06 juillet 2020 à 17:08 +0000, Sebastien Brossier a écrit :
A too strict procedure discourages people from updating their LIR details, which goes against what should be one of our primary goals: keeping the RIPE database up-to-date and accurate.
And, if the aim is to prevent fraudulent resource transfer: Why not adding to the procedure a 24months lock period to the resources after the LIR contractual name change? That could at least prevent fraudulent mechanism to take profit of such a procedure, isn't it? Regards, -- Clément Cavadore
Hi there, +1 I couldn't agree more with this, the current process is just too strict and it doesn't need to be. A signed letter from the old LIR to confirm the name change should suffice. --- * Dave Geoghegan* /Managing Director //Web World Ireland Unit B15 South City Business Centre Tallaght Dublin 24 D24 N79F /Location Map <https://www.webworld.ie/contact.php> / //Tel: +35314951112 Web: www.webworld.host Email: daveg@webworld.ie /<http://www.twitter.com/webworldireland> <http://www.facebook.com/webworldireland> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/web-world-ireland/> This message contains confidential information and is intended for the recipient. 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 06/07/2020 18:08, Sebastien Brossier wrote:
I feel the same.
Where all resources are transferable, RIPE NCC should allow a simple LIR name change with no more documentation than a LIR-to-LIR transfer. Or maybe require some link between old and new legal structures, but not the current strict requirements.
A too strict procedure discourages people from updating their LIR details, which goes against what should be one of our primary goals: keeping the RIPE database up-to-date and accurate.
-- Sébastien Brossier
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/daveg%40webworld.ie
Hello, I can share similar (bad!) experience with NCC, member spinned-off part of it's business to separate company, wanted to just transfer membership to spinned company, but NCC (registration services) staff forces it to apply for new membersip and then perform transfer. Case is open for several weeks, but NCC staff isn't able answer similar question - why isn't possible just assume/transfer membership to legal sucessor of existing member in such cases (partial spin-off), when all registered legal papers confirms this organisational change. It's quite simple task to sign new service aggreement with legal sucessor. We're in trap of bureaucracy at NCC. For simple tasks we have complex internal procedures, even requiring more resources at NCC - for processing new membership, then for processing transfer... Even from finacial perspective doesn't make sense to earn another money from member just due to organisational change (huge surplus reported each year). It seems sometimes NCC use very very extensive RIPE-709 transfer policy interpretation and tries apply it to each organisational change within organisations. Daniel On 7/6/20 3:15 PM, Clement Cavadore wrote:
Dear members,
I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-).
TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A').
... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org).
I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass.
My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it?
2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change?
I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members.
For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications.
I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead !
Thanks for reading until the end !
Hello, I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge some LIRs it's a pain in the a**. For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish the transfert. I hope the RIPE could simplify the process. Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years? In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult to find, etc. Regards, Boris PASCAULT Ecritel ________________________________ De : Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> Envoyé : lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18 À : members-discuss@ripe.net Objet : [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Dear members, I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-). TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A'). ... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org). I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass. My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it? 2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change? I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members. For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications. I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead ! Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net
Greetings, I’ve merged 4 over the years, merging was very easy, NCC have always been up to the game, helping and pointing what I was missing. How the hell a merge can take months and months? :D Are you not able to provide the needed docs? hand, jj On 8 Jul 2020, at 12:54, @exploitation_reseau <noc@ecritel.net<mailto:noc@ecritel.net>> wrote: Hello, I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge some LIRs it's a pain in the a**. For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish the transfert. I hope the RIPE could simplify the process. Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years? In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult to find, etc. Regards, Boris PASCAULT Ecritel ________________________________ De : Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net<mailto:ccavadore@vedege.net>> Envoyé : lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18 À : members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Objet : [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Dear members, I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-). TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes. From my own experience, here is what happenned to me: One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A'). ... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org). I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass. My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it? 2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change? I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members. For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications. I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead ! Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net _______________________________________________
Hello, yes, simple merges of two existing LIRs aren't complicated. But - in some cases (spinoff, company splits, for example) NCC requires you to start new membership (and pay again signup-fee) instead of assuming membership /membership transfer to legal sucessor (from "mother" to "daughter"), even such change in members structure is properly documented and formally approved by national authorities. Just because your company registration-number changed among together with name due to business structure change. According to current interpretation of ripe-709 you have to: 1) start new membership (for "daughter") 2) proceed transfer (with transfer agreement) 3) terminate old membership (for "mother") Instead of (the simple way): 1) update standard service aggreement from "mother" to "daughter" It seems that *policy* (ripe-709 at this moment) doesn't expect some normal/realworld business structure changes and due to very strict interpretation of policy there're more bureaucratic requrements from NCC, which vere pointed by multiple members here... - Daniel On 7/8/20 12:44 PM, Jānis Jaunošāns wrote:
Greetings, I’ve merged 4 over the years, merging was very easy, NCC have always been up to the game, helping and pointing what I was missing. How the hell a merge can take months and months? :D Are you not able to provide the needed docs?
hand, jj
On 8 Jul 2020, at 12:54, @exploitation_reseau <noc@ecritel.net <mailto:noc@ecritel.net>> wrote:
Hello,
I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge some LIRs it's a pain in the a**.
For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish the transfert.
I hope the RIPE could simplify the process.
Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years?
In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult to find, etc.
Regards,
Boris PASCAULT Ecritel ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *De :* Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net <mailto:ccavadore@vedege.net>> *Envoyé :* lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18 *À :* members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> *Objet :* [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ?
Dear members,
I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-).
TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A').
... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org).
I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass.
My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it?
2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change?
I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members.
For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications.
I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead !
Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net _______________________________________________
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/danny%40danysek.cz
Hello, The same case happened to me, 6 months of nonsense, so I decided to take an action - to run for RIPE board, I wrote in my agenda that RIPE is Bureaucratic-Centered and not LIR-Centered, unfortunately I received only 15% of the total votes. A very strong system worked against me to make sure that no changes will be made in RIPE. Regarding the democracy that was written here, the voting system in RIPE is that the elected #1 can choose who will be elected after him in the same GM, by asking the voters of him who to vote after him. That kind of voting system will never allow changes in RIPE, will never allow new spirits in RIPE, taking into account that elected #1 already have a position and power in RIPE board, taking into account that censorship was implemented by the same board. RIPE is being controlled by the big enterprises and by the universities, not by the common LIR. Can a representative of RIPE NCC join in and write what is the average ticket resolution time for similar cases (mergers/transfers/etc) for big enterprises (LIR's with high number of resources) and for universities ? (compared to the average ticket resolution time for such cases for all LIR's ? ) The costs of RIPE NCC which are related to human resources, don't comply with the actual responsibilities of RIPE nor with the quality of service that RIPE is providing, and clearly shows that RIPE is an inefficient organization. The only reason that I see for the long time and very tedious processes is to justify the high number of employees in RIPE NCC, to justify the major expenses of RIPE NCC for human resources, unneeded work is "being created". Currently there is an action by RIPE NCC Board Chairman to censor candidates in the next elections in order to make sure that RIPE NCC will not change for the best of everyone and that no one will dig in RIPE NCC expenses. On 14th of April 2020 I received the following response from RIPE NCC CFO Gwen van Berne, regarding my request for transparency to RIPE NCC Board of RIPE NCC providers: ------ Thanks so much for your interest in RIPE NCC’s transactions. The Finance department sees it as one of its primary roles to give the membership full insight in the financial obligations of our association. Further to your questions to the Executive Board (Christian Kaufmann) please be informed that the Finance department plans to create a Purchase History Calendar with Purchases above 100k and a Capital Investment overview with investments above 25k. These overviews will be presented to the membership during the GM in May and I am confident that this will provide you with the information you are looking for. We will start with the 2019 details and we will make a comparison with 2018. Please allow us a couple of weeks to set up a proper format that also meets GDPR requirements. Happy to answer any more questions in the meantime, ------ Since than no update was received and they didn't do what they wrote, still no one knows who are RIPE NCC providers. Regards, Elad ________________________________ From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of @exploitation_reseau <noc@ecritel.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 12:54 PM To: Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Hello, I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge some LIRs it's a pain in the a**. For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish the transfert. I hope the RIPE could simplify the process. Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years? In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult to find, etc. Regards, Boris PASCAULT Ecritel ________________________________ De : Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> Envoyé : lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18 À : members-discuss@ripe.net Objet : [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Dear members, I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-). TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A'). ... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org). I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass. My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it? 2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change? I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members. For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications. I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead ! Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net
Hello Elad, I'm very sorry to say this, but your fail in elections was because your background and methods of advertisement (like huge spam). But your high support on this elections means people really aware of problems and want changes. 08.07.20 22:40, Elad Cohen пише:
Hello,
The same case happened to me, 6 months of nonsense, so I decided to take an action - to run for RIPE board, I wrote in my agenda that RIPE is Bureaucratic-Centered and not LIR-Centered, unfortunately I received only 15% of the total votes. A very strong system worked against me to make sure that no changes will be made in RIPE.
Regarding the democracy that was written here, the voting system in RIPE is that the elected #1 can choose who will be elected after him in the same GM, by asking the voters of him who to vote after him. That kind of voting system will never allow changes in RIPE, will never allow new spirits in RIPE, taking into account that elected #1 already have a position and power in RIPE board, taking into account that censorship was implemented by the same board.
RIPE is being controlled by the big enterprises and by the universities, not by the common LIR.
Can a representative of RIPE NCC join in and write what is the average ticket resolution time for similar cases (mergers/transfers/etc) for big enterprises (LIR's with high number of resources) and for universities ? (compared to the average ticket resolution time for such cases for all LIR's ? )
The costs of RIPE NCC which are related to human resources, don't comply with the actual responsibilities of RIPE nor with the quality of service that RIPE is providing, and clearly shows that RIPE is an inefficient organization. The only reason that I see for the long time and very tedious processes is to justify the high number of employees in RIPE NCC, to justify the major expenses of RIPE NCC for human resources, unneeded work is "being created".
Currently there is an action by RIPE NCC Board Chairman to censor candidates in the next elections in order to make sure that RIPE NCC will not change for the best of everyone and that no one will dig in RIPE NCC expenses.
On 14th of April 2020 I received the following response from RIPE NCC CFO Gwen van Berne, regarding my request for transparency to RIPE NCC Board of RIPE NCC providers:
------ /Thanks so much for your interest in RIPE NCC’s transactions. The Finance department sees it as one of its primary roles to give the membership full insight in the financial obligations of our association. / / / /Further to your questions to the Executive Board (Christian Kaufmann) please be informed that the Finance department plans to create a Purchase History Calendar with Purchases above 100k and a Capital Investment overview with investments above 25k. / / / /These overviews will be presented to the membership during the GM in May and I am confident that this will provide you with the information you are looking for. We will start with the 2019 details and we will make a comparison with 2018. Please allow us a couple of weeks to set up a proper format that also meets GDPR requirements. / / / /Happy to answer any more questions in the meantime,/ ------
Since than no update was received and they didn't do what they wrote, still no one knows who are RIPE NCC providers.
Regards, Elad
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of @exploitation_reseau <noc@ecritel.net> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 8, 2020 12:54 PM *To:* Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> *Cc:* members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Hello,
I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge some LIRs it's a pain in the a**.
For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish the transfert.
I hope the RIPE could simplify the process.
Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years?
In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult to find, etc.
Regards,
Boris PASCAULT Ecritel ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *De :* Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> *Envoyé :* lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18 *À :* members-discuss@ripe.net *Objet :* [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ?
Dear members,
I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-).
TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A').
... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org).
I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass.
My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it?
2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change?
I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members.
For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications.
I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead !
Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/maxtul%40netassist.ua
Hello Max, In "background" - do you mean the false narrative that the illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project" brainwashed the community ? For your information, not a single entity is suing me - on the contrary - I was the one that initiated lawsuits and I will win them. Regarding the "methods of advertisements" - don't you as RIPE NCC member would like to know more about the candidates ? what they plan to do and what are their views and if they are connected to any of RIPE NCC providers ? Look at the current board, do you believe that any of them will risk their life, their jobs, their connections, their professional future - just that you won't have bureaucracy in RIPE NCC ? ... A person that will push for changes will be attacked, like I was attacked by the illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project", it is much much easier (and profitable) to go with the flow and not to upset anyone. Unfortunately, my high support in the elections means nothing as long as the voting keep being as it is, that the elected #1 can guide (through his close supporters) who will be elected after him in the next seats. And elected #1 can be sure that the elected after him will not interfere him and that no changes will be made in RIPE NCC. I also believe that the expenses of RIPE NCC (approximately 30M Euro per year) have an impact on the elections, we don't know who are the providers and where the expenses are flowing, RIPE NCC providers will be interested in no changes and to have the same RIPE board members over and over again (and the ones that they choose that will not push for changes), these providers that receive the 30M Euro per year are strong organizations. I also believe that it will be best if board members will not be able to be elected to more than one term. I also would like to add that in the elections period, I received an anonymous death threat from a person that claimed to be a member of the illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project": "Stop before you're banned for life." That person sent it anonymously but I did track him and he is a PhD from Cambridge University, the headquarters of the illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project". They didn't want me elected, because I'm not a puppet of them, they want to keep controlling RIPE NCC behind the scenes, and hence no changes will be made. Specially when they currently try to create a mechanism now that will avoid from me being nominated in next elections. Regards, Elad ________________________________ From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Max Tulyev <maxtul@netassist.ua> Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 12:44 PM To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Hello Elad, I'm very sorry to say this, but your fail in elections was because your background and methods of advertisement (like huge spam). But your high support on this elections means people really aware of problems and want changes. 08.07.20 22:40, Elad Cohen пише:
Hello,
The same case happened to me, 6 months of nonsense, so I decided to take an action - to run for RIPE board, I wrote in my agenda that RIPE is Bureaucratic-Centered and not LIR-Centered, unfortunately I received only 15% of the total votes. A very strong system worked against me to make sure that no changes will be made in RIPE.
Regarding the democracy that was written here, the voting system in RIPE is that the elected #1 can choose who will be elected after him in the same GM, by asking the voters of him who to vote after him. That kind of voting system will never allow changes in RIPE, will never allow new spirits in RIPE, taking into account that elected #1 already have a position and power in RIPE board, taking into account that censorship was implemented by the same board.
RIPE is being controlled by the big enterprises and by the universities, not by the common LIR.
Can a representative of RIPE NCC join in and write what is the average ticket resolution time for similar cases (mergers/transfers/etc) for big enterprises (LIR's with high number of resources) and for universities ? (compared to the average ticket resolution time for such cases for all LIR's ? )
The costs of RIPE NCC which are related to human resources, don't comply with the actual responsibilities of RIPE nor with the quality of service that RIPE is providing, and clearly shows that RIPE is an inefficient organization. The only reason that I see for the long time and very tedious processes is to justify the high number of employees in RIPE NCC, to justify the major expenses of RIPE NCC for human resources, unneeded work is "being created".
Currently there is an action by RIPE NCC Board Chairman to censor candidates in the next elections in order to make sure that RIPE NCC will not change for the best of everyone and that no one will dig in RIPE NCC expenses.
On 14th of April 2020 I received the following response from RIPE NCC CFO Gwen van Berne, regarding my request for transparency to RIPE NCC Board of RIPE NCC providers:
------ /Thanks so much for your interest in RIPE NCC’s transactions. The Finance department sees it as one of its primary roles to give the membership full insight in the financial obligations of our association. / / / /Further to your questions to the Executive Board (Christian Kaufmann) please be informed that the Finance department plans to create a Purchase History Calendar with Purchases above 100k and a Capital Investment overview with investments above 25k. / / / /These overviews will be presented to the membership during the GM in May and I am confident that this will provide you with the information you are looking for. We will start with the 2019 details and we will make a comparison with 2018. Please allow us a couple of weeks to set up a proper format that also meets GDPR requirements. / / / /Happy to answer any more questions in the meantime,/ ------
Since than no update was received and they didn't do what they wrote, still no one knows who are RIPE NCC providers.
Regards, Elad
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of @exploitation_reseau <noc@ecritel.net> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 8, 2020 12:54 PM *To:* Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> *Cc:* members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ? Hello,
I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge some LIRs it's a pain in the a**.
For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish the transfert.
I hope the RIPE could simplify the process.
Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years?
In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult to find, etc.
Regards,
Boris PASCAULT Ecritel ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *De :* Clement Cavadore <ccavadore@vedege.net> *Envoyé :* lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18 *À :* members-discuss@ripe.net *Objet :* [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ?
Dear members,
I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-).
TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A').
... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org).
I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass.
My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it?
2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change?
I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members.
For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications.
I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead !
Thanks for reading until the end ! -- Clément Cavadore
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/maxtul%40netassist.ua
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/elad%40netstyle.io
Hi, Le lundi 06 juillet 2020 à 15:15 +0200, Clement Cavadore a écrit :
TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
Addendum: RIPE-709 should be updated to be less painful in the case of mergers and acquisition. Sometimes, when a business acquires another, and reorganize its assets, companies are partially merged with others, and as a result, it is considered under section 3.2 of RIPE-709 (if the new structure is not a member). Wouldn't it be better to make that section a bit less restrictive ? For example: if ALL the resources coming from a legacy member are being integrated in a new member, why not simply allow rename the legacy LIR to the reflect the new structure (and for more security, we could also lock the resources within it, if it could help preventing hijacking of resources)? Less paperwork, more love ! -- Clément Cavadore
Dear Clément, you are not the first. There are a lot of complaints RIPE NCC internal procedures are bureaucratic, slow and unclear. It is not logic why you need to open a new LIR and then transfer you own resources to your own second LIR. May be to earn another 2х2000 EUR start-up fee? Continue to use ("fix") existing LIR is more logical, as in case of any historic issues with old LIR (like forged documents, problems with the companies merge or similar) resources can be deregistered or moved to some other party. If it was moved out - it is not possible anymore. In case of any transfer, hostmasters should be 100% sure LIR loosing address space is up to date, correct and healthly doing that transfer. But if it is - why to push to open another LIR? I think the root of the problem is RIPE is not enough involved in RIPE NCC internal processes. We (as RIPE) should have more influence in RIPE NCC procedures and it's development. Please support me anyone if I'm right. 06.07.20 16:15, Clement Cavadore пише:
Dear members,
I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and, if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the "customer experience" :-).
TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal with administrative changes.
From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make its administrative status relevant with their real situation. That was a big mistake! While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move, but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done, so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources to A').
... but a few months later: Same player play again ! Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc). => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org).
I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a pain in the ass.
My question is simple: 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the situation allows it?
2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change?
I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members.
For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private). I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good judgment when it seems valid justifications.
I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead !
Thanks for reading until the end !
Le mercredi 08 juillet 2020 à 19:49 +0300, Max Tulyev a écrit :
I think the root of the problem is RIPE is not enough involved in RIPE NCC internal processes. We (as RIPE) should have more influence in RIPE NCC procedures and it's development. Please support me anyone if I'm right.
That's exactly the point I'm trying to raise here, at the community level: I think that RIPE-709 is conter productive for the members, and I'd like to see a bit more flexibility in its processes. I am loosing my time in paperwork, while I need to update stuffs in the DB (and request an ASN on behalf of that customer), and I'm just stuck in administrative matters, just because of that mess. And if I need to open another membership in vacation period, I'll loose more and more time... sigh ! Clément Cavadore
Hi, On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 07:49:02PM +0300, Max Tulyev wrote:
I think the root of the problem is RIPE is not enough involved in RIPE NCC internal processes. We (as RIPE) should have more influence in RIPE NCC procedures and it's development. Please support me anyone if I'm right.
Paying members of the NCC, aka LIRs, have maximum influence via the AGM (though it might take a while, and if you have no majorities, stuff does not happen). Besides that, ncc-services *does* work to get NCC irks changed. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Hi. LIR's don't have influence, because there are some people who decide are there enough money for bloated budget, is it time to implement any restrictions and which voice is good and which one should not be accepted. ср, 8 июл. 2020 г., 20:55 Gert Doering <gert@space.net>:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 07:49:02PM +0300, Max Tulyev wrote:
I think the root of the problem is RIPE is not enough involved in RIPE NCC internal processes. We (as RIPE) should have more influence in RIPE NCC procedures and it's development. Please support me anyone if I'm right.
Paying members of the NCC, aka LIRs, have maximum influence via the AGM (though it might take a while, and if you have no majorities, stuff does not happen).
Besides that, ncc-services *does* work to get NCC irks changed.
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/aleksbulgakov%40gmail...
Hi, On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 09:06:06PM +0300, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
LIR's don't have influence, because there are some people who decide are there enough money for bloated budget, is it time to implement any restrictions and which voice is good and which one should not be accepted.
This statement is blatantly wrong, and you are aware of that. If the NCC management / board are indeed not listening to you, you can (as a member) put it as a voting item on the next AGM agenda. Now, if most of your LIR colleagues disagree with you, that's the problem with voting. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Hi Gert, AGM can be initially used to implement influence, but two times a year with highest bureaucratic procedures is not a real influence we need now. It can be look like AGM nominates a person from RIPE with abilities to look in, publish to the community and influence (on behalf on the community decision/concensus) on all RIPE NCC internal procedures. 08.07.20 21:11, Gert Doering пише:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 09:06:06PM +0300, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
LIR's don't have influence, because there are some people who decide are there enough money for bloated budget, is it time to implement any restrictions and which voice is good and which one should not be accepted.
This statement is blatantly wrong, and you are aware of that.
If the NCC management / board are indeed not listening to you, you can (as a member) put it as a voting item on the next AGM agenda.
Now, if most of your LIR colleagues disagree with you, that's the problem with voting.
Gert Doering -- NetMaster
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/maxtul%40netassist.ua
that escalated quickly :D as I have not had any issues with merging, sponsoring, splitting mother-daughter, I can’t agree that the NCC would do it on purpose. I’m sorry to hear that others are having issues with NCC. Just wanted to put my 2 cents in defence of the them and thank them for their services. NCC has always been understanding in my cases and pointing me to the docs/papers needed to complete the tickets. as for the DB updating - automate it. I’ve seen ipams opensource (phpipam/ipPlan) that had “the option”. p.s. I’ll enable v6 on something today :D but I’m guilty of not using “democracy” - haven’t interacted with voting.
On 8 Jul 2020, at 21:11, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 09:06:06PM +0300, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
LIR's don't have influence, because there are some people who decide are there enough money for bloated budget, is it time to implement any restrictions and which voice is good and which one should not be accepted.
This statement is blatantly wrong, and you are aware of that.
If the NCC management / board are indeed not listening to you, you can (as a member) put it as a voting item on the next AGM agenda.
Now, if most of your LIR colleagues disagree with you, that's the problem with voting.
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
participants (10)
-
＠exploitation_reseau -
Aleksey Bulgakov -
Clement Cavadore -
Daniel Suchy -
Dave Geoghegan -
Elad Cohen -
Gert Doering -
Jānis Jaunošāns -
Max Tulyev -
Sebastien Brossier