Dear all,

Lu says that 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 want to make clear that this statement does not reflect reality and that I also welcome input from our membership and community on this matter.

 

I understand from his emails that Lu sees our interactions with governments as potentially leading to a change in the nature of the RIR system that may weaken our long-established community-based governance processes. In fact, the opposite is true.

 

We have made serious efforts over the years to explain why we interact with governments, and we have been very open about those interactions. I will go further and say that our long-standing and productive relationships with governments throughout our service region have been an important factor in maintaining the current RIR system and mitigating threats to that system.

 

The message we have always put to governments is that the current system works well and that it should not be changed. We also make it clear that we welcome participation from governments as key Internet stakeholders. So while Lu might see our government interactions as something to be suspicious of, I take a different view. If we do not involve governments in our community, they will be more likely to act without reference to the experience and knowledge of our community.

 

We are also open about our interactions with both governments and the ITU. Just last week, we published a detailed article about our work at the recent ITU Plenipotentiary in Romania[1]. And for the sake of clarity, I will confirm that at the ITU meeting, we were approached by a Dutch government representative who invited US and UK government representatives to discuss the AFRINIC situation. At that meeting, I introduced them to the AFRINIC CEO, and he gave an update. I do not think that this was inappropriate or should come as a surprise. The RIPE NCC position on this is still the same as we published last year[2]. 

This week, we will present on our recent interactions at the ITU and UN developments during the Cooperation Working Group at RIPE 85[3]. Submitting such a talk at a RIPE Meeting is a strong signal that we are more than willing to discuss our interactions with governments in open forums in order to make sure that our work in this area is as transparent as possible. And I reiterate that our goal has always been to ensure governments make decisions based on the facts, and our underlying message is that the current RIR system works well and is worth maintaining. 

Regards,

 

Hans Petter Holen
Managing Director
RIPE NCC

 

[1] https://labs.ripe.net/author/suzanne_taylor_muzzin/reflections-on-the-itu-plenipotentiary-conference-2022/
[2] https://labs.ripe.net/author/hans_petter_holen/supporting-the-internet-number-registry-system/ 
[3] https://ripe85.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/coop-wg/



On 21 Oct 2022, at 15:32, Lu Heng <h.lu@larus.net> wrote:

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

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.


_______________________________________________
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/hph%40ripe.net