I apologize to everyone for the fact that I haven't been able to get time today to weigh in on all of the back and forth that's been generated by my post about verified.is. Everyone who knows me knows that I have strong feelings about pretty much everything that has been said, and that I'me never shy about expressing those opinions, but it has been a long, hard, and exhausting day. I have been trying to work on several things simultaneously. It is now past 3 AM here where I am, and I'm off to bed at last. I hope to reply here to some of the things that have been said tomorrow. But before I turn in, I feel compelled to seek a bit more infomation about the fundamental RIPE Charter. I thank Brian for directing me at the following document, which seems to be a kind of overall Charter of RIPE: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-001 That is indeed enlightening, and quite helpful, but I feel the need to press further and ask if there is also and additionally some other Charter document elsewhere. I've read on the Ripe.Net site that RIPE is formally constituted as a formal "association" under Dutch law. Where I come from, we call these kinds of things "non-profit corporations" and each one must file a document called "Articles of Incorporation" with the state in which they are formed. These Articles of Incorporation must clearly specify the purposes for which the entity is formed. Does there exist a similar sort of formal document which has been filed by RIPE, on its own behalf, with Dutch authorities? If so, I would like to be able to peruse that also as I prepare myself for drafting a propposal... hopefully one which will not conflict in any way with either the letter or the spirit of *any* of RIPEs fundamental founding documents, as ammended. Lastly, I must ask the question: What is RIPE NCC, exactly? Is it a formal organ which is itself chartered strictly and only under the auspices and authority of RIPE itself? Or is it, in any sense, an autonomous entity which is in some ways (or perhaps in all ways) NOT bound to obey and/or show total fealty to the Charter of RIPE itself, e.g. as embodied in ripe-001 and/or any such other documents which together consitute RIPE's formal Charter? I beg everyone's patience with me for asking these questions here. I do understand that many, most or all subscribers here may deride me for asking about things that are arguably "off topic". But to be frank, I don't think they are off topic at all. The work of this WG, such as it is, must live within the confines of the Charter of RIPE itself. Certainly for me, and I suspect also for other members of this WG, a proper review of, and respect for the fundamental tenents of RIPE itself must guide the work ahead, whatever it may be. Regards, rfg
Dear Ronald F. Guilmette
I've read on the Ripe.Net site that RIPE is formally constituted as a formal "association" under Dutch law.
I think there is a small misunderstanding. RIPE is not formally constituted. It is the RIPE NCC which is, and it is an association under Dutch law, as you say above.
Does there exist a similar sort of formal document which has been filed by RIPE, on its own behalf, with Dutch authorities?
No, but you can find the RIPE NCC's Articles of Association at https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-602
Lastly, I must ask the question: What is RIPE NCC, exactly? Is it a formal organ which is itself chartered strictly
Yes, it is a membership organisation, registered as an Association in The Netherlands.
and only under the auspices and authority of RIPE itself?
RIPE does not have "authority" over RIPE NCC, it is the members. In many cases the RIPE community and the RIPE NCC membership overlap, but not always. I hope this helps. Best regards, Janos
Regards, rfg
Hi, On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:38:15PM +0200, Janos Zsako wrote:
and only under the auspices and authority of RIPE itself?
RIPE does not have "authority" over RIPE NCC, it is the members. In many cases the RIPE community and the RIPE NCC membership overlap, but not always.
I can't let this sentence go totally unchallenged :-) - the relationship between RIPE, the RIPE NCC members, and the RIPE NCC is a bit more complicated than that. In "organizational matters" (money, board, ...), only the (paying) members of the NCC decide by matter of the annual general meeting, and voting. In *policy* matters, like "under which rules does the RIPE NCC hand out IP addresses", the RIPE *community* decides, by following the policy development process the community has given itself. The NCC acts as the secretariat that manages the resources according to these policies. The policy development, of course, takes into account feedback from the RIPE NCC and the RIPE NCC board, to avoid creating policies that would endanger the stability of the RIPE NCC, or have unexpectedly high monetary consequences ("needing 100 new employees"). Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
In *policy* matters, like "under which rules does the RIPE NCC hand out IP addresses", the RIPE *community* decides, by following the policy development process the community has given itself. The NCC acts as the secretariat that manages the resources according to these policies.
Well, even a bit more complicated than that - Sometimes, policy directives rule into the contractual relationship of a member with the NCC in which case the membership must vote on a change in the contract. rgds, Sascha Luck
In message <57AB1227.1070100@iszt.hu>, Janos Zsako <zsako@iszt.hu> wrote:
No, but you can find the RIPE NCC's Articles of Association at https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-602
Thank you! That document is most helpful.
RIPE does not have "authority" over RIPE NCC, it is the members. In many cases the RIPE community and the RIPE NCC membership overlap, but not always.
I have many questions. I hope nobody will mind. I will try to be brief. I'm still trying to understand. RIPE is *not* RIPE NCC and vise versa, correct? I mean they are two different things, legally speaking, yes? A person or legal entity could be a member of "RIPE" and yet not be a member of "RIPE NCC", correct? Conversely, could a person or legal entity be a member of "RIPE NCC" and yet _not_ be a member of "RIPE"? Is it correct also that only those persons and legal entities that are actually paying dues to RIPE NCC are members of RIPE NCC? The "Publication date" on the "RIPE NCC Articles of Association (2013)" as presented at the URL above is "20 Jan 2014", but RIPE NCC, as a formal association under Dutch law has existed for far longer than that, correct? On what date did RIPE NCC first obtain legal existance under Dutch law? In the entire history of RIPE NCC, as a formal association under Dutch law, has there ever been any instance in which The Association has applied either Section 6.1(b) or Section 6.1(e) of the Articles of Association? If so, on how many separate occasions have such terminations occured? With respect to each such instance, if any, has The Association obeyed in full the stipulation, as to its own behavior contained in Section 10.5 of the Articles of Association? Regards, rfg
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:27:04PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
I'm still trying to understand. RIPE is *not* RIPE NCC and vise versa, correct? I mean they are two different things, legally speaking, yes? A person or legal entity could be a member of "RIPE" and yet not be a member of "RIPE NCC", correct?
Correct. Technically, every internet user is a member of the RIPE community.
Conversely, could a person or legal entity be a member of "RIPE NCC" and yet _not_ be a member of "RIPE"?
Only in theory, really.
Is it correct also that only those persons and legal entities that are actually paying dues to RIPE NCC are members of RIPE NCC?
Yes. Well, those who have a contract, but that involves a membership fee. rgds, Sascha Luck
Hi Ronald,
Lastly, I must ask the question: What is RIPE NCC, exactly?
This is a common question. I think this section on https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe gives a good starting point:
What's the difference between RIPE and the RIPE NCC?
Although similar in name, the RIPE NCC and RIPE are separate entities. The RIPE NCC provides administrative support to RIPE, such as the facilitation of RIPE Meetings and providing administrative support to RIPE Working Groups.
The RIPE NCC was established in 1992 by the RIPE community to serve as an administrative body.
The RIPE community refers collectively to any individual or organisation, whether members of the RIPE NCC or not, that has an interest in the way the Internet is managed, structured or governed.
So RIPE is the community (no formal membership required, just subscribe to a mailing list and/or show up at RIPE meetings) and RIPE NCC is the formal Association under Dutch law that is the Regional Internet Registry for this region, allocating IP addresses and ASNs, and has paying members. From https://www.ripe.net/about-us:
We’re the Regional Internet Registry for Europe, the Middle East and parts of Central Asia. As such, we allocate and register blocks of Internet number resources to Internet service providers (ISPs) and other organisations.
We’re a not-for-profit organisation that works to support the RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) community and the wider Internet community. The RIPE NCC membership consists mainly of Internet service providers, telecommunication organisations and large corporations.
And then there is the link between the two: the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-626 in section 6.1 states: "The Member acknowledges applicability of, and adheres to, the RIPE Policies and RIPE NCC procedural documents.". So the members of the RIPE NCC agree to adhere to the policies set by the RIPE community. The RIPE community has to keep this in mind when developing new policies: we can't contradict the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement. For example: policy can't set prices as there is a different procedure for setting those in the service agreement. Because of the way RIPE and RIPE NCC work together and the similar naming the difference between RIPE and RIPE NCC is often "forgotten". I know many people that say "RIPE" when they mean "RIPE NCC", so you are not alone in not knowing where the boundary is :) Cheers, Sander
You all already know that I'm no good at all at this whole brevity thing, but I'll try. First I must thank Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> for helping me to understand the rather confusing relationship between "RIPE" and "RIPE NCC". The latter has a formal legal charter, which I assume is a binding legal document under Dutch law. The former (RIPE itself) is in contrast a rather informal amorphous (and egalitarian!) blob of participants which nicely bends over backwards to be inclusive, even to the extent of admitting into its club Americans of dubious repute, if not to say sanity, including even those who have never contributed a single guilder to the common enterprise. But this still leaves me with the question: To which entity do the various RIPE documents, and, in particular, ripe-001 apply? To which entity are these documents "binding" legally or otherwise? Either? Neither? Are the documents ripe-001 and more generally, ripe-XXX merely informal statements of intent, or mission, which have binding legal effect only upon "RIPE" which does not itself even exist as a legal entity? Is ripe-001 only an informal statement of original intent for RIPE, one which has now neither any legal enforcable force or effect upon either RIPE or RIPE NCC? That would seem to be the case, legally speaking. RIPE NCC has formal Articles of Association, and the ripe-001 document is not a part of that. Thus, in the unlikely event that there were to be found some apparent conflict between the RIPE NCC Articles of Association and, for example, the ripe-001 document, then the terms of the former would override and nullify any conflicting provision of the latter, correct? Sorry. I'm sure that most subscribers to this list don't have the least interest in exploring any of this legal fine print or mumbo jumbo. However I am persuaded that no progress can be made without reference to the fundamental documents and baseline intent of these associations, both formal (RIPE NCC) and informal (RIPE). If general agreement can be reached on anything... a proposition that is itself still dubious at best... then it is only likely to be arrived at within the context of, and with all due respect for all those generally accepted agreements which have already and previously been achieved. Regards, rfg
Hi Ronald, May I propose to do a call and explain a bit about the community and the NCC roles ? And the WG's etc ? Regards, Erik Bais Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
Op 11 aug. 2016 om 01:37 heeft Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg@tristatelogic.com> het volgende geschreven:
You all already know that I'm no good at all at this whole brevity thing, but I'll try.
First I must thank Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> for helping me to understand the rather confusing relationship between "RIPE" and "RIPE NCC". The latter has a formal legal charter, which I assume is a binding legal document under Dutch law. The former (RIPE itself) is in contrast a rather informal amorphous (and egalitarian!) blob of participants which nicely bends over backwards to be inclusive, even to the extent of admitting into its club Americans of dubious repute, if not to say sanity, including even those who have never contributed a single guilder to the common enterprise.
But this still leaves me with the question: To which entity do the various RIPE documents, and, in particular, ripe-001 apply? To which entity are these documents "binding" legally or otherwise? Either? Neither?
Are the documents ripe-001 and more generally, ripe-XXX merely informal statements of intent, or mission, which have binding legal effect only upon "RIPE" which does not itself even exist as a legal entity? Is ripe-001 only an informal statement of original intent for RIPE, one which has now neither any legal enforcable force or effect upon either RIPE or RIPE NCC?
That would seem to be the case, legally speaking. RIPE NCC has formal Articles of Association, and the ripe-001 document is not a part of that. Thus, in the unlikely event that there were to be found some apparent conflict between the RIPE NCC Articles of Association and, for example, the ripe-001 document, then the terms of the former would override and nullify any conflicting provision of the latter, correct?
Sorry. I'm sure that most subscribers to this list don't have the least interest in exploring any of this legal fine print or mumbo jumbo. However I am persuaded that no progress can be made without reference to the fundamental documents and baseline intent of these associations, both formal (RIPE NCC) and informal (RIPE). If general agreement can be reached on anything... a proposition that is itself still dubious at best... then it is only likely to be arrived at within the context of, and with all due respect for all those generally accepted agreements which have already and previously been achieved.
Regards, rfg
In message <B6A12EA1-F7E0-422B-99B9-40F4B5C63121@a2b-internet.com>, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
May I propose to do a call and explain a bit about the community and the NCC roles ? And the WG's etc ?
Thanks for the generous offer Eric, but I am fine for now, I think. Anyway, I think it is better, actually, if some of my questions get answered here, in public, on the mailing list. Then I can refer to those answers later on, when someone tells me my proposal is crap. :-) I am still awaiting answers to the following very important questions, which I have already posted. Surely _someone_ must know the answers, and the answers should be quite simple, not even worthy of taking up any voice time, as the answers should not need any explaining: In the entire history of RIPE NCC, as a formal association under Dutch law, has there ever been any instance in which The Association has applied either Section 6.1(b) or Section 6.1(e) of the Articles of Association? If so, on how many separate occasions have such terminations occured? With respect to each such instance, if any, has The Association obeyed in full the stipulation, as to its own behavior, which is contained within Section 10.5 of the Articles of Association? Can no one really answer these rather rudimentary questions? Regards, rfg
Ronald, It's possible nobody here can (although I wouldn't want to speak for everyone). Those questions should more properly be directed towards the RIPE NCC, or, more likely, the RIPE NCC Executive Board, all of whom are lovely people. The latter can be reached at exec-board@ripe.net I'm happy to pass this query on on your behalf? Brian Brian Nisbet, Network Operations Manager HEAnet Limited, Ireland's Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin 1 Registered in Ireland, no 275301 tel: +35316609040 fax: +35316603666 web: http://www.heanet.ie/ On 11/08/2016 07:00, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <B6A12EA1-F7E0-422B-99B9-40F4B5C63121@a2b-internet.com>, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
May I propose to do a call and explain a bit about the community and the NCC roles ? And the WG's etc ?
Thanks for the generous offer Eric, but I am fine for now, I think.
Anyway, I think it is better, actually, if some of my questions get answered here, in public, on the mailing list. Then I can refer to those answers later on, when someone tells me my proposal is crap. :-)
I am still awaiting answers to the following very important questions, which I have already posted. Surely _someone_ must know the answers, and the answers should be quite simple, not even worthy of taking up any voice time, as the answers should not need any explaining:
In the entire history of RIPE NCC, as a formal association under Dutch law, has there ever been any instance in which The Association has applied either Section 6.1(b) or Section 6.1(e) of the Articles of Association? If so, on how many separate occasions have such terminations occured?
With respect to each such instance, if any, has The Association obeyed in full the stipulation, as to its own behavior, which is contained within Section 10.5 of the Articles of Association?
Can no one really answer these rather rudimentary questions?
Regards, rfg
In message <f94c6681-08d5-70a9-27b3-3da79925dd8c@heanet.ie>, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:
Ronald,
It's possible nobody here can (although I wouldn't want to speak for everyone). Those questions should more properly be directed towards the RIPE NCC, or, more likely, the RIPE NCC Executive Board, all of whom are lovely people.
The latter can be reached at exec-board@ripe.net
I'm happy to pass this query on on your behalf?
Yesssss! Please do pass my questions, as you think appropriate, to the Executive Board. I really do think that if the questions are sent to them by you, in your capacity as chair of this group, you'd have a lot better chance of getting both a complete answer and... just as importantly... a *timely* answer than if the questions just came to The Board from some non-dues-paying Yankee interloper, e.g. me. As always, thanks a lot Brian. Regards, rfg
Ronald, On 11/08/2016 20:44, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <f94c6681-08d5-70a9-27b3-3da79925dd8c@heanet.ie>, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:
Ronald,
It's possible nobody here can (although I wouldn't want to speak for everyone). Those questions should more properly be directed towards the RIPE NCC, or, more likely, the RIPE NCC Executive Board, all of whom are lovely people.
The latter can be reached at exec-board@ripe.net
I'm happy to pass this query on on your behalf?
Yesssss! Please do pass my questions, as you think appropriate, to the Executive Board. I really do think that if the questions are sent to them by you, in your capacity as chair of this group, you'd have a lot better chance of getting both a complete answer and... just as importantly... a *timely* answer than if the questions just came to The Board from some non-dues-paying Yankee interloper, e.g. me.
As always, thanks a lot Brian.
I've passed them on now. I'm travelling myself over the next few weeks, but I'll try to keep the group updated on any answers. Brian Brian Nisbet, Network Operations Manager HEAnet Limited, Ireland's Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin 1 Registered in Ireland, no 275301 tel: +35316609040 fax: +35316603666 web: http://www.heanet.ie/
participants (7)
-
Brian Nisbet -
Erik Bais -
Gert Doering -
Janos Zsako -
Ronald F. Guilmette -
Sander Steffann -
Sascha Luck [ml]