At 11:14 AM 25-09-03 +0200, Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE-NCC) wrote:
For starters, I disagree with the statement that this is a new service that was not approved by anybody beforehand. The TT-WG was set up for
Huh? I made that statement? I said "Another new service I'd like to discuss is the TTM ip2asn service as presented at RIPE-46: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-tt-as-tracero..." I think you are reading things that are not quite there.
From your previous postings, I have understood that you do not like the current model where every WG can ask the RIPE NCC for specific actions. However, this was the procedure at the time. Even with the advent of the NCC-services WG it appears to us as the correct procedure for something like this, because it is germane to the TT-WG and does not involve a significant amount of resources.
From: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/ncc-services/index.html#charter The aim of this WG would be to discuss at least the following: · performance of existing services · introduction of new services, new tools · an ongoing evaluation of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan Is it the RIPE NCC's view that this charter is no longer valid and the text for bullet #2 should instead be "introduction of new services, new tools that involve a significant amount of resources"?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal@ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre WWW: http://www.ripe.net/home/henk P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That problem that we weren't having yesterday, is it better? (Big ISP NOC)
-Hank