On 4 Jul 2021, at 7:29, Saku Ytti wrote:
On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 at 08:11, Daniel Karrenberg <dfk@ripe.net> wrote:
My intention was not to sneer, …
I am happy you did not *intend* to sneer. Maybe it even did not sound like that to everyone. ;-) You certainly hit one of *my* sensitivities because to me you sounded like countless others who take cheap shots at the ‘de-facto monopoly’ and its ‘mission creep’ while they ignore the bottom-up way the RIPE NCC is organised. Typically their only suggestion on how to improve is to call for ’competition’. Well, ‘competition’ and ‘monopoly’ are not really compatible by definition. With your explanation this ‘sneer’ turns into the strangest way ever of saying that a comfortably funded ‘de-facto monopoly’ with sensible amounts of ‘mission creep’ is more resilient and stable than a company that is focussed on shareholder value in the next quarter or a bare bones registry operation. And I agree with you; which will not really surprise anyone. It is essential to keep both the registry service and the ‘mission creep’ acceptable to both the community and the paying membership. Such acceptance comes from a combination of trust and control. That was the essence of what I was trying to say. Now let’s stop this intermission and get back to the matter at hand, ’RIPE NCC and the Cloud - Let’s Start Again’. We have noticed some damage to community trust and we are working hard to repair that. Gaining trust is always harder than loosing it. Stay tuned for another summary of the concerns and requirements that we heard so far and suggestions on how to move forward. Everyone, please let us know if we missed something important. It does not hurt to say something positive about how we all deal with this either. ;-) ;-) :-) Daniel