RIPE 47 Meeting Report
(Apologies for any duplicate mails.) RIPE 47 Meeting Report Dear Colleagues, The <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/index.html>RIPE 47 Meeting was held from 26 - 30 January 2004 at the Grand Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. There were a total of 253 attendees comprised of the RIPE NCC membership, the RIPE community and government representatives. Attendees also included representatives from APNIC, ARIN, AfriNIC, LACNIC, ICANN and IANA. HIGHLIGHTS ========== - Highlights of RIPE 47 included the open discussion on the services of the RIPE NCC during the RIPE NCC Services Working Group; updates on the World Summit on the Information Society from Mirjam Khne, ISOC, and Axel Pawlik, Managing Director, RIPE NCC; an AfriNIC update; the proposal by the RIPE community to make RIPE 152 ( 'Charging by Local Internet Registries') a historical document. - As announced by Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair, two RIPE Meetings will be held in 2005. Based on the feedback from the community, this schedule will continue in 2006. The RIPE NCC will offer additional support to RIPE Working Groups to facilitate discussion and progress between RIPE Meetings. - Robin Tasker (CCLRC) gave a presentation on the European Commission-sponsored DataTAG project. - The European Operators Forum (EOF) featured an NSP Security BoF, a presentation on which types of SMTP flows should be blocked to prevent spam, a case study on the migration of AOL's backbone network from OSPF to IS-IS and discussion on the use of XML in network configuration. EOF presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/index.html#eof>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/index.html#eof - The RIPE NCC, Afilias, Cisco, NIKHEF, NOKIA, Riverhead and SURFnet are thanked for the support they provided to the meeting. Global Voice Networks are thanked for the provision of excellent Internet connectivity. SUMMARY ======== ADDRESS POLICY - It was proposed that RIPE 152 ('Charging by Local Internet Registries') should be made a historical document and that the RIPE NCC should make a clear statement on <http://www.ripe.net/>www.ripe.net that it does not charge for IP addresses. - Hans Petter Holen, Chair, will form a task force to write a policy development process proposal. - Consensus is needed on the mailing list on the AfriNIC proposal regarding /22 minimum allocation size. - Hans Petter Holen, Chair, will start a discussion on the mailing list on changing the 80% rule for IPv4 allocations. Address Policy Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#ap>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#ap DATABASE - The issue of CRISP versus joint Whois was discussed. - The proposal to introduce new attribute "abuse-c" in the inet(6)num objects was discussed. - A detailed proposal about "abuse-c" will be sent to Database Working Group mailing list. Database Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#db>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#db TEST TRAFFIC MEASUREMENT (TTM) - It was noted that as of 1/1/2004 changes were made to the TTM service contract: Fees were lowered (from 3000 EUR per year to 1000 EUR per year) and all data has been made public as specified in RIPE 300 ('Test Traffic Measurement Service Data Disclosure Policy'). - Two presentations made use of TTM delay data: a presentation on delay tomography used traceroute data from the TTM project; a presentation on the reordering of IP packets used delay data. TTM Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#tt>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#tt ANTI-SPAM - A proposal has been sent to the Database Working Group mailing list regarding the inclusion of an abuse-c attribute/object in the RIPE Database to help solve the problem of misdirected/multiple spam complaints. - It was noted that the European Commission Directive is now widely implemented and that in the United States CAN-SPAM is the first federal legislation. IPv6 - The anycast policy discussion was sent to the Address Policy Working Group. - There was discussion on how 6 to 4 is being used to spoof IPv4 origin addresses to make Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks anonymous. - There was a presentation on the security implications of IPv6 on IPv4 networks. IPv6 Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#ipv6>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#ipv6 EIX - An editorial group will be set up to revise the exchange point operator wish list for switches. - Operator-member charters for exchange points were discussed. - DE-CIX presented their experience migrating to new hardware and adding new premises. EIX Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#eix>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#eix DN* - The DNR Forum and the DNS Working Group were combined under the DNS Working Group heading. - It was noted that the ENUM RFC 2916bis has been approved by the IETF Working Group and is in the queue of the RFC editor. - It was noted that Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) are being deployed in more new regions. DN* Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#dn>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#dn ROUTING - There was a presentation on RISwhois, a tool that allows IP address to origin ASN mapping. - Case studies about convergence of IGP protocols were presented and discussed. Routing Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#routing>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#routing RIPE NCC SERVICES - Bijal Sanghani, FLAG Telecom, was appointed as the co-chair of the Working Group. - The RIPE NCC will explore the possibility of providing a service giving test statistics on the routability of new blocks. - The RIPE NCC will give a status update on the Activity Plan 2004 and request input for the Activity Plan 2005 during the RIPE NCC Services Working Group at RIPE 48. RIPE NCC Services Working Group presentations can be viewed at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#ncc-services>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/#ncc-services TUTORIALS ========= The RIPE NCC staff presented the RIPE NCC IP Request Tutorial. It explained address space assignment and allocation procedures in the RIPE NCC region: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/tutorials/ip-request/>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/tutorials/ip-request/ RIPE 47 WEBCASTING AND ARCHIVES ============================== During RIPE 47, the RIPE NCC held trials in collecting feedback from participants watching the webcast. The mediums used for this were IRC and Jabber. Archives of presentations, webcasts and IRC/Jabber feedback from RIPE 47 are available at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/sessions-archive.html>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/sessions-archive.html HOSTMASTER CONSULTATION CENTRE (HCC) ==================================== The RIPE NCC Hostmaster Consultation Centre was open at RIPE 47, allowing RIPE NCC Members to discuss issues relating to their business directly with RIPE NCC Hostmasters. RIPE 47 REFERENCE PAGE ====================== A complete list of RIPE 47 sessions, tutorials and presentations can be found at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/index.html>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/index.html "MEET & GREET" ============= The RIPE NCC's "Meet & Greet" was available for first-time RIPE Meeting attendees at RIPE 47. "Meet & Greet" introduces newcomers to the meetings, to key attendees from the RIPE community and to social events throughout the week. More information can be obtained by contacting: <meet-greet@ripe.net>. RIPE 48 ====== RIPE 48 will be held in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, from 3 - 7 May 2004. Information on RIPE 48 will soon be made available at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-48/>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-48/ New Local Internet Registries (LIRs) ========================== Please note: New LIRs are entitled to two (2) free tickets to attend a RIPE Meeting. The tickets cover the meeting fee only and do not apply to the RIPE dinner, travel or hotel accommodation. More information on the new LIR tickets can be found at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/new-lir.html>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/new-lir.html For more information, contact <meeting@ripe.net>. -- end --
Folks, (distribution list trimmed - but not certain if this is a local-ir or ncc-services issue) --On 23 February 2004 11:55 +0100 Nick Hyrka <ncc@ripe.net> wrote:
... HIGHLIGHTS ========== ... - As announced by Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair, two RIPE Meetings will be held in 2005. Based on the feedback from the community, this schedule will continue in 2006. The RIPE NCC will offer additional support to RIPE Working Groups to facilitate discussion and progress between RIPE Meetings.
I remember being at the RIPE47 meeting where this was announced as a fait accompli. What I don't remember was the RIPE47 meeting where there was any real debate or discussion about it. If we leave aside the number of meetings per year for a moment, what I find most concerning about this is that a reasonably substantive change to the way that we operate as a policy-making community has been slipped in without any chance to express reservations or concerns, or hear reasoning one way or another. This is a dangerous path to tread as I am sure all will agree. On the subject of meetings, it is accepted that mailing list discussions are moved forwards rapidly at the meetings, as we have a chance to discuss things face to face in working groups which in general leads to more rapid conclusion of policy decisions. If we have a new operating method where there are two 'major' RIPE meetings a year, and some 'lesser' committee meetings for the working groups, do we end up with people who have an interest now having to travel to all of the meetings rather than just the current RIPE meetings to ensure that something they care about is not being discussed without them present? I'm not certain that having interim meetings works well anyway - from past experience I have seen much momentum at industry meetings where different groups then go off with the best intentions of having several sub-committee meetings before the next major meeting. For a variety of reasons, this does not then happen - and my experience was with the meetings held in London - for people working in and around London. In the RIPE case, there would be the added necessity to potentially travel around Europe or from further away to participate. The current meetings are worthwhile for those flying in from the USA or far east as there is much taking place - would the attraction still be there for any interim cut-down meeting? So in short, I'm not at all convinced that two meetings a year is a Good Thing, nor am I particularly happy about the way it has been introduced. Regards, Paul. -- Paul Thornton, PRT Systems Ltd Tel: +44 1825 740756 Fax: +44 1825 740136 GSM: +44 7885 373379
Paul,
I remember being at the RIPE47 meeting where this was announced as a fait accompli. What I don't remember was the RIPE47 meeting where there was any real debate or discussion about it.
Hence why we have this issue!
On the subject of meetings, it is accepted that mailing list discussions are moved forwards rapidly at the meetings, as we have a chance to discuss things face to face in working groups which in general leads to more rapid conclusion of policy decisions. If we have a new operating method where there are two 'major' RIPE meetings a year, and some 'lesser' committee meetings for the working groups, do we end up with people who have an interest now having to travel to all of the meetings rather than just the current RIPE meetings to ensure that something they care about is not being discussed without them present?
I don't think this is always the case. Travel isn't always required for meetings, conference calls could be used to deal with many of the issues that are resolved face to face.
So in short, I'm not at all convinced that two meetings a year is a Good Thing, nor am I particularly happy about the way it has been introduced.
Well to me this sounds like a fudge also. I think 1 meeting per quarter is more than adequate but the length of the current RIPE meeting is frankly insane and there is absolutely no reason for the meeting to be as long as it is. The fundemental issue still remains. There are still too many random projects with questionable value going on within the "RIPE". Regards, Neil.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 [chair hat off]
I remember being at the RIPE47 meeting where this was announced as a fait accompli. What I don't remember was the RIPE47 meeting where there was any real debate or discussion about it.
Hence why we have this issue!
Although I am not sure I would call it fait accompli, there wasn't much discussion around it. I can agree with that.
On the subject of meetings, it is accepted that mailing list discussions are moved forwards rapidly at the meetings, as we have a chance to discuss things face to face in working groups which in general leads to more rapid conclusion of policy decisions. If we have a new operating method where there are two 'major' RIPE meetings a year, and some 'lesser' committee meetings for the working groups, do we end up with people who have an interest now having to travel to all of the meetings rather than just the current RIPE meetings to ensure that something they care about is not being discussed without them present?
I don't think this is always the case. Travel isn't always required for meetings, conference calls could be used to deal with many of the issues that are resolved face to face.
I think the face to face meetings provide a great value. And I am also not very happy with two meetings per year. I think three would be better.
So in short, I'm not at all convinced that two meetings a year is a Good Thing, nor am I particularly happy about the way it has been introduced.
Well to me this sounds like a fudge also. I think 1 meeting per quarter is more than adequate but the length of the current RIPE meeting is frankly insane and there is absolutely no reason for the meeting to be as long as it is.
But these are two different issues. I kind of agree that having meetings more frequent, but shorter is a good idea - where "more frequent" might equal to three times a year.
The fundemental issue still remains. There are still too many random projects with questionable value going on within the "RIPE".
I have no idea what this has to do with meeting frequency. There is a well defined process to handle project of the RIPE NCC. Frequency of RIPE meetings, no. - - kurtis - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBQDuAcqarNKXTPFCVEQJWUACgi51x9HN0dQS7bGQBO+EHCMapEo0AoJKl CXWO4KToOwrz3BP5jj/C1u4b =3wNR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (4)
-
Kurt Erik Lindqvist -
Neil J. McRae -
Nick Hyrka -
Paul Thornton