February 2022 - cooperation-wg

Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Live Blog
by Gergana Petrova 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

Dear colleagues, RIPE NCC staff will be sharing key moments and takeaways from the sessions at the global IGF taking place this week. You can already find a few posts there from the week of pre-events: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/gergana_petrova/igf-2020-liveblog Let us know what you thought. Any feedback and comments are very welcome! Best regards, Gergana -- Gergana Petrova External Relations RIPE NCC

1 1

NIS2 update: EU ministers agreed on the general approach
by Marco Hogewoning 21 Jun '22

21 Jun '22

Dear colleagues, We just received a message that the EU Ministers of the Transport, Telecommunications, and Energy Council, in their meeting today, have agreed to the general approach on the NIS 2 proposal. This now paves the way for the negotiations, the so called trilogue, to start early next year and develop a final compromise proposal. While the official text has not been published yet, we have seen a copy of the working document that shows that the Council position has also removed the DNS root servers from the scope of the directive, together with a short inclusion in the text that emphasises the role of multistakeholder Internet governance. We expect that this text has not been changed prior to today's meeting and is part of the general approach that was just endorsed. This means that as the negotiations start, both the EU member states and the European Parliament will come to the table with a position that the DNS root servers should be removed from the scope of the NIS 2 proposal. This leaves us with some confidence that the final outcome will reflect those positions and exclude the DNS root servers. Further to the concerns of the community, the Council text also has significant changes to the scope of the DNS services in general, which I think will limit the impact of the proposal, especially on smaller operators or entities who run a DNS server only for their own purpose. The Council issued a press release: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2021/12/03/strength… I would like to thank all my colleagues and community members who have helped to convey the message that governance of the DNS root servers should be left to the multistakeholder community and the risks that the Commission's proposal brings to maintaining a single global and un-fragmented Internet. I would also like to thank all the delegates of the various member states for taking the time to listen to us and to take on board our comments and concerns, leading to the compromise that was agreed today. We will keep you informed about further progress on this dossier. Regards, Marco Hogewoning Manager Public Policy and Internet Governance, RIPE NCC

7 8

Open Technology Fund (OTF) fellowship and funds
by Corinne Cath 28 Feb '22

28 Feb '22

Dear all, I trust this email finds you well. I am a long-time lurker and occasional participant in the cooperation wg. I wanted to reach out in my new role as the Vice President of Research for the Open Technology Fund (OTF) <http://www.opentech.fund/>. We are an independent non-profit organization dedicated to advancing internet freedom in the world’s most repressive environments. I am reaching out to highlight our Internet Controls Fellowship Program (ICFP) <https://www.opentech.fund/funds/icfp/#:~:text=The%20Information%20Controls%…> which might be of interest to your networks. OTF funds the applied research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored internet access to enable citizens worldwide to exercise their fundamental human rights online. The ICFP fellowship program supports individuals doing research to examine restrictions on the free flow of information by repressive governments. In particular, ICFP fellows track Internet interference practices and investigate emerging means of overcoming censorship in repressive environments - the countries, regions, or areas worldwide where Internet freedom is most threatened. (see fellowship call below, deadline for application is March 13th). I would really appreciate it if you would be able to share it with the community. Kind regards, -- Dr. Corinne Cath Vice President of Research Open Technology Fund | w: opentech.fund | t: @OpenTechFund Signal: +1 202 209 6820 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Open Technology Fund Information Controls Fellowship Program (ICFP) Call The Open Technology Fund (OTF) <http://www.opentech.fund/> is an independent non-profit organization dedicated to advancing internet freedom in the world’s most repressive environments. OTF supports the applied research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored internet access to enable citizens worldwide to exercise their fundamental human rights online. OTF’s Information Controls Fellowship Program (ICFP) is open for applications for its ninth fellowship cohort, with a final deadline of March 13, 2022. The application and additional information can be found here <https://www.opentech.fund/funds/icfp/>. About the Program The ICFP fellowship program supports individuals doing research to examine restrictions on the free flow of information by repressive governments. In particular, ICFP fellows track Internet interference practices and investigate emerging means of overcoming censorship in repressive environments - the countries, regions, or areas worldwide where Internet freedom is most threatened. Efforts that focus on investigating the security and privacy of tools used in these contexts are also supported. The ICFP program offers flexibility for candidates with fellowships available for three, six, nine, or twelve months in duration. This allows for the support of a wider range of proposed efforts, from those that are relatively short-term to projects that are larger in scope. The fellowship offers a monthly stipend of $5,000 along with stipends for travel and equipment. Independent Study with Organizational Support All ICFP fellows are based with a host organization, these can also be academic departments, for the duration of their fellowship term. Host organizations should demonstrate the ability to assist the applicant in carrying out the proposed scope of work. Applicants can propose any host organization on their application as long as sufficient justification for the selection is provided. For example, if you’re proposing to work on a project studying how misinformation spreads online, then your proposed host organization should be equipped to provide expert guidance on this topic. OTF welcomes host organizations from non-academic organizations as well as those that are based outside of the United States. Or vice versa, if you are affiliated with an organization and want to host an ICFP fellow at your organization, please email icfphost(a)opentech.fund for more information. Supported Topical Areas of Study Past fellows have explored a range of topics and technological focuses, including country and region-specific information controls studies; the development of research-focused software tools used to investigate Internet censorship as well as those that can circumvent online censorship; studies around targeted digital attacks aimed at at-risk users; and research into security vulnerabilities in technologies used by at-risk communities. To get a better sense of the types of efforts supported through the ICFP program, you can read about the current (eighth) cohort of fellows here <https://www.opentech.fund/news/announcing-otfs-newest-8th-class-of-informat…>, and past classes here (rounds one <https://www.opentech.fund/news/information-controls-fellowship-first-round-…> , two <https://www.opentech.fund/news/icfp-second-round-wrap-up-results-and-outcom…> , three <https://www.opentech.fund/news/icfp-third-round-wrap-up-results-and-outcome…> , four <https://www.opentech.fund/news/fourth-cohort-information-controls-fellows-r…> , five <https://www.opentech.fund/news/2018-ICFP-wrap-up/>, six <https://www.opentech.fund/news/announcing-otfs-newest-class-of-information-…>, and seven <https://www.opentech.fund/news/announcing-otfs-latest-class-of-information-…> ). Questions? If you have any questions, please post them in this public spreadsheet <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RNxswHBoOxWEqq4Yo_ozaqOUziN3BI4pr8L…> and they will be answered in a prompt fashion. If your question is not appropriate for a public forum, please email icfp(a)opentech.fund. If the fellowship is not a good fit for you, please check out the additional avenues for funding that OTF offers through our other funds, including the Internet Freedom Fund (IFF). <https://www.opentech.fund/funds/internet-freedom-fund/> -- Dr. Corinne Cath Vice President of Research Open Technology Fund | w: opentech.fund | t: @OpenTechFund Signal: +1 202 209 6820

1 0

IGF Open Consultation meeting starts today
by Chris Buckridge 23 Feb '22

23 Feb '22

Dear working group, Just a reminder that today is the first IGF Open Consultation of the year (to be followed by two half-days of MAG meetings). The meetings are fully virtual, open to all, and kick off in just under an hour. You can register to gain access at the following link, as well as find details of the agenda: https://intgovforum.org/en/content/igf-2022-first-open-consultations-and-ma… Hope to see some RIPE community members in the discussion, and I’ll provide some reporting and updates to this list next week. Best regards, Chris

1 0

Big telcos and net neutrality
by Johan Helsingius 18 Feb '22

18 Feb '22

I am sure many of you have seen this. https://www.internetnews.me/2022/02/14/big-telcos-want-to-break-net-neutral… My first reaction was to laugh at the irony, but then I remembered that those guys still have a huge lobbying power. Is this something we want to discuss and address in the group (webinar, communique, whatever)? Julf

2 1

DNS4EU - proposal for a community response - draft
by Desiree Miloshevic 10 Feb '22

10 Feb '22

Dear members, dear all Further to the RIPE NCC’s summary of the DNS4EU Open House discussion and further to your witnessing of our earlier 'transparent wordsmithing consultation' with other RIPE - WG Chairs, I’d like to propose the following high level statement draft for your consideration. Julf and myself, as Co-Chairs are in agreement with this draft statement and Achilleas had excused himself due to his affiliation with the EC. We’d like to know if there is some support from members for having a RIPE community response on this proposal? We would really appreciate your feedback or any comments you’d wish to make or if you'd like us to work further on this. Many thanks for your consideration and the feedback, Desiree -- Coop WG Co-Chair Proposed DNS4EU RIPE community statement comments 1. RIPE community believes that governance of the DNS resolution chain, which is such an important element of everybody's Internet connectivity, should involve all stakeholders and can not solely rely on legislation and regulatory oversight. 1. RIPE Community hopes that any winning bidder will adhere to what we see as a fundamental property of the Internet, with a diverse and competitive landscape, anchored on the principles of multistakeholder Internet governance. 2. RIPE Community believes that the responsibility of well-functioning Internet access including the DNS resolution is with the access providers. We believe it should stay that way. 3. We understand that to be able to minimise some risks when the end user selects a random DNS resolver, a possible and feasible solution is to have the access provider run their local DNS resolvers and/or an additional DNS resolver as a back-up. 4. We hope that the EU could allocate DNS4EU funds to the local Internet community and encourage Internet access providers to run their local DNS resolvers. Additionally, the funds can be also used towards the development of open source software for better and affordable DNS resolution services. On 2 Feb 2022, at 15:26, Chris Buckridge <chrisb(a)ripe.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, Thank you to all who joined for the RIPE NCC Open House discussion of DNS4EU on Monday, 31 January. We have posted a summary of some key points and links to the video archive here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/ Cheers Chris -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https: <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg>

6 6

Fwd: DNS4EU - community response draft
by Desiree Miloshevic 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

Dear all Further to the RIPE NCC’s summary of the DNS4EU Open House discussion posted bellow, and further to your witnessing of our our earlier transparent wordsmithing consultation with other Chairs ;), I’d like to propose the following high level statement draft for your consideration. Julf and myself, as Co-Chairs are in agreement and Achilleas had excused himself due to his role at the EC. We’d like to know if there is some support from members for having a RIPE community response on this proposal? We would really appreciate your feedback or any comments you’d wish to make. Lastly we'd appreciate if the DNS WG Co-chairs would consider sharing this draft with their members too, since most of the DNS4EU discussion is taking place on that list. Many thanks for your consideration and the feedback, Desiree -- Coop WG Co-Chair Proposed DNS4EU RIPE community statement RIPE community believes that governance of the DNS resolution chain, which is such an important element of everybody's Internet connectivity, should involve all stakeholders and can not solely rely on legislation and regulatory oversight. RIPE Community hopes that any winning bidder will adhere to what we see as a fundamental property of the Internet, with a diverse and competitive landscape, anchored on the principles of multistakeholder Internet governance. RIPE Community believes that the responsibility of well-functioning Internet access including the DNS resolution is with the access providers. We believe it should stay that way. We understand that to be able to minimise some risks when the end user selects a random DNS resolver, a possible and feasible solution is to have the access provider run their local DNS resolvers and/or an additional DNS resolver as a back-up. We hope that the EU could allocate DNS4EU funds to the local Internet community and encourage Internet access providers to run their local DNS resolvers. Additionally, the funds can be also used towards the development of open source software for better and affordable DNS resolution services. On 2 Feb 2022, at 15:26, Chris Buckridge <chrisb(a)ripe.net <mailto:chrisb@ripe.net>> wrote: Dear colleagues, Thank you to all who joined for the RIPE NCC Open House discussion of DNS4EU on Monday, 31 January. We have posted a summary of some key points and links to the video archive here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/ <https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/> Cheers Chris -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg>

1 0

Heads up on DNS4EU - idea for community high level comment.
by Desiree Miloshevic 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

Hi everyone I’ve made a draft, in agreement with Julf, on behalf of the Coop WG, (Achilleas excused because of his role). We’d like to share this with you before it goes out to the Coop WG members, and to involve DNS WG, since the DNS4EU discussion was mainly housed at the DNS WG. The idea is to ask members if they’d be happy for us to go out with a high level statement on this. If they say yes, we go ahead and wordsmith it. If they shoot it down, we do not do it. Looking fwd to your comments and if you like it how we would involve both or all community WGs. Tx! Desiree — DNS4EU High Level Statement 1. Any solution for DNS resolvers should adhere to the Multistakeholder governance principles and respect the principles of distributed and modular nature of the DNS. (Saying that mandated use of centralised DNS resolvers is not a good principle and should not be only based on legislation). It is questionable if the proposed solution would solve the problem described. 2. The responsibility of well-functioning Internet access including the DNS resolution is with the access providers. We believe it should stay that way. 3. We understand that to be able to minimise some risks when the end user selects a random DNS resolver, a possible and feasible solution is to have the access provider run their local DNS resolvers and/or an additional DNS resolver as a back-up. 4. The EU could allocate DNS4EU funds to the local Internet community and encourage Internet access providers to run their local DNS resolvers. Additionally, the funds can be also used towards the development of open source software for better and affordable DNS resolution services.

2 1

DNS4EU Open House: summary and recording
by Chris Buckridge 02 Feb '22

02 Feb '22

Dear colleagues, Thank you to all who joined for the RIPE NCC Open House discussion of DNS4EU on Monday, 31 January. We have posted a summary of some key points and links to the video archive here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/dns4eu-ripe-ncc-open-house-discussion/ Cheers Chris

1 0