I also want to say thanks for input, and that Im looking forward working with this WG. I'm (still) on vacation, though, and will not be able to read my office email until end of July. I'll still have another week of vacation in Aug, but after Aug 18 Im back "on track" again :-) Hope you all have a nice summer! /Maria Häll
From: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se> Date: må 14 jul 2008 15.10.18 GMT+02:00 To: ripe-list@ripe.net Cc: Marin Boyle <martin.boyle@nominet.org.uk>, Maria Häll <maria.hall@enterprise.ministry.se
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
After input from a number of people (thanks) and discussion with the proposed working group chairs, here is a new version of the proposed charter. Changes to the charter specifically include talking about what this working group is *not* to discuss.
I have heard indirectly that some individuals are not happy with the name of the wg. I am not married to this name. It was just something I came up with as we agree we should NOT call it "enhanced cooperation". If not anyone comes up with a better name, I propose we live with this for now, and then change the name if someone comes up with something better. I do not personally want this discussion on what the name is block the creation of the wg. We need it, me thinks, in Dubai.
Patrik, holder of the pen
Collaboration Working Group
Suggested chairs:
Martin Boyle, Nominet Maria Häll, Swedish Government
The RIPE community decision-making processes are open to anyone, meaning that anyone with an interest can suggest policy, take part in reviewing documents and participate on mailing lists and at RIPE Meetings. To encourage participation from people and organisations outside the traditional RIPE community, a number of special outreach programs have been developed, including a series of "Governmental Roundtable Meetings", at which RIPE community members and government representatives can meet and discuss common areas of interest. Government representatives participate in RIPE Meetings, and the RIPE NCC actively reaches out to governments and others in the public sector to inform them on issues related to the RIPE community and engage them on issues related to RIPE and RIPE NCC activities.
The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing on collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet matters. This kind of collaboration has taken on increased prominence in recent years, as the wider Internet community strives to ensure that all voices are heard and the interests of all parties are considered. Fostering more open dialogue between all stakeholders is vital to ensuring the continued stability of the Internet.
The working group discusses the following:
1. Topics raised by working group participants that are of interest to both the public and private sectors. Topics are NOT to overlap with issues discussed in other working groups. This working group should complement the other working groups.
2. The RIPE NCC's current outreach activities will be reported, and the RIPE NCC will seek advice and guidance on future activities. This to make the discussions more focused as the current only forum is the ripe-list@ripe.net mailing list.
3. The working group will develop and clarify the RIPE community's position on issues that are of relevance to the public sector or on which a community position has been sought. These discussions are to be more focused in a working group targeted for these kind of discussions.
4. The working group will be responsible for maintenance of the RIPE Document produced by the Enhanced Cooperation Task Force, describing the RIPE community, existing policy development processes and outreach programs. This working group does explicitly NOT have change control over the PDP itself, just change control of the document that describe it.
The working group is also an important channel through which the RIPE community can communicate with others in the "Information Society". The chairs are not to become special "Ambassadors" for RIPE. Their role is the same as other wg chairs at RIPE, which implies they of course could be asked now and then what the status of the wg is. The process by which RIPE and RIPE NCC respectively coordinate with other bodies (such as NRO) and communicate (mostly via RIPE NCC or the chair of RIPE) is not changing by creation and existence of this wg.
Begin forwarded message:
From: <michael.dillon@bt.com> Date: ti 15 jul 2008 12.00.42 GMT+02:00 To: <ripe-list@ripe.net> Subject: RE: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Collaboration Working Group
If anyone has comments on this proposal, should it be discussed here on the ripe-list or will there be a wg list created soon for the discussion?
--Michael Dillon
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se> Date: ti 15 jul 2008 14.51.05 GMT+02:00 To: michael.dillon@bt.com Cc: ripe-list@ripe.net Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
On 15 jul 2008, at 12.00, <michael.dillon@bt.com> <michael.dillon@bt.com
wrote:
Collaboration Working Group
If anyone has comments on this proposal, should it be discussed here on the ripe-list or will there be a wg list created soon for the discussion?
The mailing list for the wg is not created before the wg is created. If you have issues on the wg itself, then you should bring it up here.
After the wg is created, of course the charter can be discussed, changed and what not, and that should happen on the wg mailing list.
So I think my question to you is: Do you think this proposed charter is "good enough" to get things going?
If the answer is "no", then you should bring up the issues here and now.
Patrik
Begin forwarded message:
From: <michael.dillon@bt.com> Date: ti 15 jul 2008 15.47.08 GMT+02:00 To: <ripe-list@ripe.net> Subject: RE: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
So I think my question to you is: Do you think this proposed charter is "good enough" to get things going?
Yes it is good enough to get started.
I asked the question because I want to invite some people to participate in the discussion.
--Michael Dillon
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se> Date: ti 15 jul 2008 18.48.04 GMT+02:00 To: <michael.dillon@bt.com> Cc: <ripe-list@ripe.net> Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
On 15 jul 2008, at 15.47, <michael.dillon@bt.com> wrote:
So I think my question to you is: Do you think this proposed charter is "good enough" to get things going?
Yes it is good enough to get started.
I asked the question because I want to invite some people to participate in the discussion.
And it also helped me think about what I have suggested :-)
Patrik
Begin forwarded message:
From: "tp" <ripe@dial.pipex.com> Date: on 16 jul 2008 10.27.29 GMT+02:00 To: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se>, <ripe-list@ripe.net> Cc: "Marin Boyle" <martin.boyle@nominet.org.uk>, Maria Häll <maria.hall@enterprise.ministry.se
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration Reply-To: "tp" <ripe@dial.pipex.com>
I find the use of public sector, as in "The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing on collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet matters." somewhat strange and perhaps misleading.
My (not insignificant) country has a public and a private sector, and the former has grown steadily over the past 10 years, encompassing a wide variety of services and businesses. To me, public sector means state owned, state run, answerable to ministers, as opposed to private sector, run by a board of directors, answerable to share holders.
Is this really what you mean? I suspect not.
Tom Petch
Begin forwarded message:
From: Roland Perry <roland@ripe.net> Date: on 16 jul 2008 21.59.51 GMT+02:00 To: ripe-list@ripe.net Cc: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se>, Marin Boyle <martin.boyle@nominet.org.uk
, Maria Häll <maria.hall@enterprise.ministry.se>, tp <ripe@dial.pipex.com
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
In message <021a01c8e746$54d17800$0601a8c0@allison>, at 10:27:29 local time, on Wed, 16 Jul 2008, tp <ripe@dial.pipex.com> remarked:
I find the use of public sector, as in "The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing on collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet matters." somewhat strange and perhaps misleading.
My (not insignificant) country has a public and a private sector, and the former has grown steadily over the past 10 years, encompassing a wide variety of services and businesses. To me, public sector means state owned, state run, answerable to ministers, as opposed to private sector, run by a board of directors, answerable to share holders.
Is this really what you mean? I suspect not.
There's an old saying that goes something like...
"The World is divided into two sets of people:
Those who divide the world into two sets of people
and
Those who don't"
Multistakeholder discussions often get off to a bad start if too much time is spent defining rigid boxes to put the stakeholders in.
I would encourage those who wish to see this WG succeed, to think about ways of expressing the idea that a major objective is demonstrating outreach from the "traditional RIPE Community" to "everyone else", but particularly Governments, Regulators and NGOs, who we are trying to bring into our community. -- Roland Perry Public Affairs Officer, RIPE NCC
Begin forwarded message:
From: "tp" <ripe@dial.pipex.com> Date: fr 18 jul 2008 10.21.07 GMT+02:00 To: <ripe-list@ripe.net>, "Roland Perry" <roland@ripe.net> Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration Reply-To: "tp" <ripe@dial.pipex.com>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Roland Perry" <roland@ripe.net> To: <ripe-list@ripe.net> Cc: "Patrik Fältström" <patrik@frobbit.se>; "Marin Boyle" <martin.boyle@nominet.org.uk>; "Maria Häll" <maria.hall@enterprise.ministry.se
; "tp" <ripe@dial.pipex.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 9:59 PM Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Multistakeholder discussions often get off to a bad start if too much time is spent defining rigid boxes to put the stakeholders in.
I would encourage those who wish to see this WG succeed, to think about ways of expressing the idea that a major objective is demonstrating outreach from the "traditional RIPE Community" to "everyone else", but particularly Governments, Regulators and NGOs, who we are trying to bring into our community.
Right. That to me is a much clearer, and likely to be more fruitful, expression of what this proposed working group is about than the term 'Public sector'.
I see quite a lot of this kind of activity and often see it designated 'outreach' which might be a name for it here.
Tom Petch
-- Roland Perry Public Affairs Officer, RIPE NCC
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrik Fältström <patrik@frobbit.se> Date: fr 18 jul 2008 13.21.51 GMT+02:00 To: ripe-list@ripe.net Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Given the input regarding the wording "public sector", I have now changed the first bullet.
Patrik
Collaboration Working Group
Suggested chairs:
Martin Boyle, Nominet Maria Häll, Swedish Government
The RIPE community decision-making processes are open to anyone, meaning that anyone with an interest can suggest policy, take part in reviewing documents and participate on mailing lists and at RIPE Meetings. To encourage participation from people and organisations outside the traditional RIPE community, a number of special outreach programs have been developed, including a series of "Governmental Roundtable Meetings", at which RIPE community members and government representatives can meet and discuss common areas of interest. Government representatives participate in RIPE Meetings, and the RIPE NCC actively reaches out to governments and others in the public sector to inform them on issues related to the RIPE community and engage them on issues related to RIPE and RIPE NCC activities.
The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing on collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet matters. This kind of collaboration has taken on increased prominence in recent years, as the wider Internet community strives to ensure that all voices are heard and the interests of all parties are considered. Fostering more open dialogue between all stakeholders is vital to ensuring the continued stability of the Internet.
The working group discusses the following:
1. Primary task for this working group is to discuss outreach from the "traditional RIPE Community" to "everyone else", but particularly Governments, Regulators and NGOs, who we are trying to bring into our community. Topics are NOT to overlap with issues discussed in other working groups. This working group should complement the other working groups.
2. The RIPE NCC's current outreach activities will be reported, and the RIPE NCC will seek advice and guidance on future activities. This to make the discussions more focused as the current only forum is theripe-list@ripe.net mailing list.
3. The working group will develop and clarify the RIPE community's position on issues that are of relevance to the public sector or on which a community position has been sought. These discussions are to be more focused in a working group targeted for these kind of discussions.
4. The working group will be responsible for maintenance of the RIPE Document produced by the Enhanced Cooperation Task Force, describing the RIPE community, existing policy development processes and outreach programs. This working group does explicitly NOT have change control over the PDP itself, just change control of the document that describe it.
The working group is also an important channel through which the RIPE community can communicate with others in the "Information Society". The chairs are not to become special "Ambassadors" for RIPE. Their role is the same as other wg chairs at RIPE, which implies they of course could be asked now and then what the status of the wg is. The process by which RIPE and RIPE NCC respectively coordinate with other bodies (such as NRO) and communicate (mostly via RIPE NCC or the chair of RIPE) is not changing by creation and existence of this wg.