September 2022 - ripe-list - mailman.ripe.net

Call for Topics for RIPE 85 Community Plenary
by Mirjam Kuehne 19 Apr '23

19 Apr '23

Dear colleagues, The call for proposals for RIPE 85 has been opened. The RIPE community plenary will take place on Thursday, 27 October, in the afternoon. If there are any specific topics you would like to discuss during this session, please let us know before 5 September. Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE Chair

1 1

LIR and Member Agreements
by denis walker 21 Oct '22

21 Oct '22

Colleagues [I make no apologies for the length of this email. There are so many errors to discuss. For an overview you can stop reading at the line of '----'. Below that is the detailed review of all the errors.] I have been reading lots of policies, procedures and agreements/contracts over the last couple of months to catch up with current and historical developments of address policy and it's application to allocating resources. It has been an eye opener. Right now I want to focus mainly on the 'RIPE NCC LIR Account Agreement'. Most of the documents I have read are poorly written. This is probably one of the worst. I will itemise below the details of what is wrong with this document. But firstly I will point out some of the serious mistakes. In this agreement there is a definition in Article 1... -RIPE NCC services The Membership Services provided through an LIR account as specified in the current version of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan. In the 'RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement" there is also this definition in Article 1... -RIPE NCC services The Membership Services as specified in the current version of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan. There are no Membership Services specified in the current version of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan. There hasn't been such a specification since the activity plan of 2017. So for the last 5 years all the active SSAs and LIR Agreements have been referring to an 'empty list'. As both these agreements revolve heavily around these services, I have no idea what the legal significance is of agreements based on an empty list of services. Another serious issue is the absolute, total lack of any legal definition of an LIR (Local Internet Registry) and LIR account and the relationship between LIR and Member. I have not been able to find any such definitions anywhere on the ripe.net website. I fear they may be mentioned in some early RIPE document written 20 years ago that no one could reasonably be expected to find in relation to these agreements. Then we have in Article 3 of the SSA: "the Member acknowledges and accepts that it has obtained the right to use the RIPE NCC services under the conditions outlined in this agreement." And in Article 3 of the LIR Agreement: "the Member acknowledges and accepts that it has obtained the right to use the RIPE NCC services through this LIR account under the conditions outlined in this Agreement." So under what conditions can a Member use these (undefined) services? -those in the SSA -those in the LIR Agreement -a superset of the two sets -the intersection of the two sets ********** I want to put forward a suggestion that the RIPE NCC engages the services of, or employs, a professional contract lawyer to review and if necessary re-write all of the agreements/contracts used by the RIPE NCC. Or at least someone with legal training and experience in the area of contract writing. ********** It was said in a zoom meeting last Wednesday (about reviewing the PDP) that we should keep to a minimum the legal terminology and rely on common sense. That was a valid mindset in the 1990s when the internet was mostly an 'old boys/girls club'. In 2022 this is a very different global, critical industry. The IPv4 market has also changed this industry. There is so much money invested in IPv4 addresses that one 'wrong' decision by the RIPE community could face a legal challenge. If the RIPE NCC has to go to court to defend such an action they would have a better defence based on rock solid, well written, legally watertight contracts than based on a set of poorly written, contradictory documents, common sense and a generally accepted view of how things work(ed). Almost every document I have read has mistakes in it. Some have lots more than others. I wondered why people sign contracts with so many mistakes. Then I realised that most of the Members are not native English speakers, and neither are their lawyers. They almost certainly pass these documents through some translation app. Probably they accept some of the errors as translation errors. So if they go to court over these contracts it will be a case of an LIR arguing over what they think they signed, vs the RIPE NCC defending what they think they wrote. Neither will be a true reflection of reality. I know some people will criticise me for pointing out 'trivial' grammar errors in this document. (Some people will just criticise me anyway.) They will say they are not important. There are much bigger issues to deal with. We don't want to get lawyers involved in this process. Common sense will always prevail. If it ain't broke don't fix it...etc etc. This LIR Agreement is a legal contract at the core of the RIRs business (and it is broken). The quality of this document should reflect the professionalism of the RIR. As a legal contract it should be rock solid, well written and legally watertight. If there is ever a legal dispute with a Member, this contract, along with the equally error ridden SSA, may take centre stage. Do you really want to gamble on a contract that looks like it was written as an undergraduate project? For a native English speaker reading these documents, the grammar errors just leap off the page. They are trivial to find and fix. (So why have they not already been fixed?) For the legal and other content errors, a contract lawyer would not be expected to make such basic, clumsy mistakes. It is the three 'C's that present the biggest problem - Consistency, Continuity and Contradiction. Someone needs to have a clear view in their mind of the entire document set. When a document is changed or a new document is written they should know where to look to ensure integrity is maintained across the whole set. That simply has not been the case up to now. ---------------------------------------------------- So let's look at this LIR agreement in more detail. I am basing my comments on this version: https://www.ripe.net/about-us/legal/ripe-ncc-lir-account-agreement There is no definition of LIR or LIR account or any explanation of the relationship between a Member and an LIR (account). Article 1 "The Membership Services provided through an LIR account as specified in the current version of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan." There is no list of services in the activity plan. Article 2.2 "To enter into this Agreement for additional LIR accounts the Member must send to the RIPE NCC...one copy of the Agreement containing the handwritten signature of an authorised representative of the Member." This is ambiguous. It could suggest you sign one agreement for the initial LIR and one agreement for all additional LIR accounts, not one agreement for 'each' additional account. It should say: "To enter into this Agreement for each additional LIR account, the Member must..." Is it possible for a Member to delegate operational control of an LIR account to another (anonymous) company or natural person in the same way some Members delegate management of their RIPE Database objects to a consultant? It is not clear if an LIR account is an administrative concept or something tangible that can be delegated. As the initial LIR account is not subject to any agreement (see below) that one can certainly be delegated. Article 2.3 "The RIPE NCC reserves the right to amend this Agreement. The RIPE NCC shall notify the Member of such amendments at least one month before these amendments come into effect." This clause is almost certainly unenforceable. It is also ridiculous. It says the RIPE NCC can make any change it wants to this agreement at any time (after you have signed it) without any consultation with any individual, group or community and without any consensus, approval or acceptance and put the change into effect and expect all LIRs to comply with the change. If the NCC wants to fix the simple grammar errors, they would probably get away with it. Any substantive change would almost certainly be met with a legal challenge. They cannot impose a substantive change on 20k+ signatories. The SSA says: "2.3 The Member acknowledges and accepts that the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement may be amended by a resolution of the General Meeting of the RIPE NCC according to the procedure outlined in the RIPE NCC Articles of Association. An amendment shall automatically become effective upon the date mentioned in the resolution or the date of first publication of the resolution of the General Meeting and the full text of the amended agreement on https://www.ripe.net, whichever is the latest, without the re-signing of the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement being necessary." The same conditions must apply to changing the LIR Agreement. Article 3.3 "The Member acknowledges applicability of, and adheres to, the RIPE Policies and RIPE NCC procedural documents." Use of 'Member' and 'LIR' are interchanged throughout these documents. This agreement is about an LIR account. Do policies also apply to the LIR account or just to the Member? This is not clearly defined. Article 3.4 "The Member shall provide the RIPE NCC with complete, updated and accurate information necessary for the provision of the RIPE NCC services and shall assist the RIPE NCC with audits and security checks as outlined in the RIPE NCC procedural documents, and in particular with the RIPE NCC procedural document “Due Diligence for the Quality of the RIPE NCC Registration Data”." Is this the same information required by Article 2.2 of the SSA? Articles 2, 3 and 6 of the SSA overlap considerably with Articles 2 and 3 of the LIR Agreement. Such overlaps encourage contradictions between separate contracts. Article 3.6 refers to the document ‘Closure of Members, Deregistration of Internet Resources and Legacy Internet Resources' https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-775 This document (ripe-775) was last updated on 30 Dec 2021, which is quite recent. Yet in Section B.1.b it says: "Internet number resources are allocated/assigned based on a specific need. When the original technical requirements or the business purpose for the use of the Internet number resources changes, the allocation/assignment becomes invalid. If the RIPE NCC notices any change in the original technical criteria or the original business purposes for using the Internet number resources, the RIPE NCC is authorised to deregister the relevant Internet number resources." This conflicts with ripe-733 'IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region', Section 5.1 which says: "On application for IPv4 resources LIRs will receive IPv4 addresses according to the following: - All allocation requests are placed on a first-come-first-served waiting list. No guarantees are given about the waiting time. - The size of the allocation made will be exactly one /24. - The sum of all allocations made to a single LIR by the RIPE NCC is limited to a maximum of 256 IPv4 addresses (a single /24). If this allocation limit has been reached or exceeded, an LIR cannot request an IPv4 allocation under this policy." No mention of any 'need' based requirement. This has been the case at least since November 2019. This shows the lack of continuity and contradictions between these documents. Article 3.7 says: "Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, this Agreement is valid only for one specific LIR account. If the Member wishes to operate an additional LIR accounts, the Member shall sign an additional RIPE NCC LIR Account Agreement." Note the plurality of "an additional LIR accounts". It may be a simple typo. But as written it supports my comment above on Article 2.2 that maybe only one agreement needs to be signed for all additional LIR accounts. Article 4.2 "The Member's obligation to pay any fees corresponding for the LIR account of this Agreement" 'for' instead of 'to' - Another simple grammar error. Article 4.3 "The Member shall make the payment to the RIPE NCC within 30 days of date of invoice" of 'the' date - Another simple grammar error. (Or perhaps even 'within 30 days of the date of the invoice') Article 4.4 "without prejudice to any other of the RIPE NCC's rights which it may revoke against the Member in connection with the latter's failure to effect (timely) the payment." 'other' is in the wrong place, 'to any of the RIPE NCC's other rights' 'revoke' instead of 'invoke' '(timely) the payment' instead of 'the (timely) payment' More simple grammar errors. Article 4.1 refers to the 'RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2022' and Article 4.6 refers to the 'RIPE NCC Billing Procedure and Fee Schedule' document This takes us off into billing and fees documents. I have reviewed these documents at the end. Article 5.2 "The Member shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement at any time." It doesn't say if the Member needs to give any notice period. Maybe: "The Member shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement at any time with immediate effect." Article 6.1 "The Member shall also be liable for all aspects of its use and all that ensues from its use from the Internet number resources." It should say 'its use of the Internet...' This wording, 'its use', only puts liability onto the Member if they use the resources themselves. It does not put liability onto the Member if they allow someone else to use the resources by assigning them. The wording should be 'the use' or 'any use'. Then the Member accepts full liability for use of these resources by anyone. Article 6.6 "The Member shall indemnify the RIPE NCC against any and all third party claims filed against the RIPE NCC in relation to the Member's use of the RIPE NCC services." Again the indemnity is limited to claims resulting from only the Member's use of the services. This article should say: "The Member shall indemnify the RIPE NCC against any and all third party claims filed against the RIPE NCC in relation to the any use of the RIPE NCC services provided to this Member through any of it's LIR accounts." Then it doesn't matter who is using the services. Article 6.7 "In any event the RIPE NCC's liability shall be limited to a maximum amount equivalent to the Member's service fee of the relevant financial year" This may apply in the event of the Member filing a claim against the RIPE NCC. If a third party files a claim against the RIPE NCC, I don't think the RIPE NCC can set it's own limit on the claim within an agreement the third party has not signed. Article 7.2 "The RIPE NCC's intellectual property (agreements, documents, software, databases, website, etc.) may only be used, reproduced and made available to third parties upon prior written authorisation from the RIPE NCC." If the Member has been allocated address space and they sub-allocate part of that space to another organisation, this is an acceptable use of the address space. By making assignments from the sub-allocation the second organisation will make use of the RIPE Database. This is an acceptable use of the RIPE NCC's intellectual property (database) without written authorisation needed. Article 8.2 "Any disputes that may arise from this Agreement shall be settled in accordance with the RIPE NCC Conflict Arbitration Procedure." This highlights one of the base issues with this LIR Agreement. It clearly started life as a copy of the SSA which was then modified to create the LIR Agreement. If you replace 'this Agreement' with 'the RIPE NCC SSA' you have the basis of Article 11.2 of the SSA. The problem in this Article 8.2 is that the Conflict Arbitration Procedure (ripe-691) is specific to the SSA. Disputes arising from the LIR Agreement are not within scope, according to both the Introduction and Section A.1. of the Procedure. But even in Article 11.2 of the SSA "shall be settled" should be changed to "may be settled". There is always the option to take a dispute to a national court. (Incidentally after a quick read, I only found one error in ripe-691. In Section C.1. "timeframe cannot not exceed".) Article 2.2 "By signing the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement as instructed by the RIPE NCC the Member confirms that they have read, understood and agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement for an initial LIR account." After writing all of the above I was told by a Member that they don't sign an LIR Agreement for their initial LIR account. It is somehow implied by signing the SSA. The LIR Agreement is only signed for additional LIR accounts. Now I understand the intention of the wording of Article 2.2 but it is complete madness. You can NOT hold me to the terms of this agreement because I signed some other agreement that makes no mention of this one. IF the SSA included something like this "The LIR Agreement forms an integral part of this SSA. By signing the SSA the Member agrees to be bound by the terms of the LIR Agreement for their initial LIR account." then it would be valid. BUT the SSA makes no mention anywhere of the LIR Agreement. In fact the SSA only mentions 'LIR' 7 times and they are all links to the 'Closure of LIR...' procedure. Article 6.1 of the SSA does say: The Member acknowledges applicability of, and adheres to, the RIPE Policies and RIPE NCC procedural documents. The RIPE Policies and the RIPE NCC procedural documents are publicly available from the RIPE NCC Document Store. These documents, which may be revised and updated from time to time, form an integral part of and apply fully to the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement. Each revised document will receive a new document number and can be found on https://www.ripe.net." It then includes a non-exclusive list of these documents, which does not include the LIR Agreement. There are several key points in Article 6.1 that specifically EXCLUDE the LIR Agreement from being an integral part of the SSA. Although the term 'procedural documents' is not defined anywhere, just like LIR, it would be a considerable stretch of the imagination to include an agreement or contract in a commonly understood definition of a procedural document. It also specifically says in 6.1 that the 'procedural documents are publicly available from the RIPE NCC Document Store'. The LIR Agreement is not listed in the document store. It also says 'Each revised document will receive a new document number'. Unlike the SSA, the LIR Agreement does not have a document number. The LIR Agreement is therefore NOT an integral part of the SSA. Signing the SSA does not bind a Member to the terms of the LIR Agreement. This opens an entire can of worms. None of the Member's initial LIR accounts are registered as LIR accounts. None of them are subject to any terms or conditions. As the charging scheme requires a service fee per (registered) LIR and these initial LIR accounts are not registered, technically Members do not need to pay a fee for their initial LIR accounts. Another interesting point is that all RIPE NCC procedural documents are said to form an integral part of the SSA. These documents may be 'revised and updated'. Article 2.3 of the SSA says changes to the SSA need a resolution by the GM. Under what conditions can a procedural document be changed if it is an integral part of the SSA? How is a new procedural document implemented if it becomes an integral part of the SSA? ********** As I said at the start of this email, it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or experienced in contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's contracts and agreements so they actually say what they were intended to mean. ********** Moving on to the billing docs referenced in the LIR Agreement, there seems to be 3 significant documents which contradict each other. One even contradicts itself. The referenced 'RIPE NCC Billing Procedure and Fee Schedule' document https://www.ripe.net/participate/member-support/payment is marked as last updated on 19 Dec 2018 but refers to the fees for 2022 and has probably been updated each year. What it says is confusing: "RIPE NCC members pay a membership fee every year. For 2022, this fee is €1,400. This is charged on a pro rata basis for new member. New members also pay a sign-up fee, which is currently €1,000. Members can have more than one LIR account, but they must pay the membership and sign-up fee for each LIR account." Again total confusion between Members and LIR accounts. The 'RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2022' refers to this as a 'service fee' not a 'membership fee'. It doesn't make sense to refer to it as a membership fee and then say it is paid per LIR account. This wording also suggests that there is a sign-up and annual fee for being a member and also a sign-up and annual fee for each LIR account, including the initial LIR account. It makes no distinction between initial and additional LIR accounts. 'This is charged on a pro rata basis for new member.' should say 'new members' - Another simple grammar error. In the 'RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2022' document https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-771 it says: "New members or additional LIR account registrations also pay an additional one-time sign-up fee alongside their annual contribution." Again this is grammatically totally wrong. It uses 'or' instead of 'and'. Also an 'LIR account' is not an entity that can pay anything. It should say: "An additional one-time sign-up fee is paid alongside the annual contribution for new members and when new LIR accounts are registered." In the 'RIPE NCC Billing Procedure 2022' document https://www.ripe.net/participate/member-support/payment/ripe-ncc-billing-pr… it has the same incorrect sentence as the Charging Scheme document: "New members or additional LIR account registrations also pay an additional one-time sign-up fee alongside their annual contribution." In 2.1 the image does not match the table immediately following the image. In Column A of the table it should show the one-time sign-up fee for New Members as 'per LIR account'. For Existing Members it should show the one-time sign-up fee for 'Additional LIR accounts' also in Column A. In 3. it is not clear if the service fees for all LIR accounts set up by a new member will be applied pro rata. Also there is no mention if the service fees for an existing member who sets up additional LIR accounts during the year will pay a pro rata fee for the new LIR accounts. It also says the 'pro rata for each quarter' will be based on 'the time of the year the membership application is submitted.' This has to be the time of year the SSA is concluded. You cannot reasonably charge for services before the period in which the services are made available. In 3.1 it says "The annual invoices will be sent to members between the end of the first quarter and the beginning of the second quarter of 2022." This time period does not exist. It has to be either 'after the end of the first quarter' or 'before the start of the second quarter'. In 3.2 it says "Members are responsible for providing and maintaining correct billing." It should be 'billing details'. In 3.3 it suggests that payment for any Member LIR account can come from any source. There doesn't appear to be any requirement for the payment details to match up with the Member legal entity or natural person. Surely this is open to abuse, fraud or money laundering possibilities? I have done an extensive review here of the LIR Agreement and touched on some of the errors in the SSA and billing documents. Almost every policy, procedure, agreement, contract, document I have read has one or more grammar and/or content errors. Maybe it is time for a full review.... cheers denis co-chair DB-WG

16 23

Proposed Changes to the Draft Code of Conduct Process
by Leo Vegoda 03 Oct '22

03 Oct '22

Dear RIPE community, We have had one piece of public feedback on the draft and one off-list message. We encourage you to read the document and share your response as well if you haven’t done so already. We intend to incorporate all the feedback publicly shared so far into the next draft with two exceptions. These are: 1. The process for constituting the Code of Conduct Team is our next piece of work. It won't be included in our updated draft but will be published separately. 2. The RIPE Chair is a point of escalation. Making the RIPE Chair involved in decisions at an earlier stage reduces the opportunity for escalation later. The key changes we will make to the draft are: 1. We will make the section on data retention easier to read. As we've only had one comment on the content, we won't make changes to it yet. If there is more feedback, we'll adjust accordingly. 2. We will add an appendix about the Code of Conduct TF and the document production process. 3. We will expand the section on statistical reporting. If you think we should make any other changes, please let us know. Kind regards, Leo Vegoda for the Code of Conduct TF

2 1

Digital Rights: 2022 Community Health Village: A Look into Collective Healing
by Vesna Manojlovic 30 Sep '22

30 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, as a follow-up to Community Resilience focus from last year [1], here is a link to the initiative from Digital Rights in Tech community: a series of educational and experiential online sessions which are scheduled for the months of October and November 2022. The sessions provide knowledge and perspectives from diverse mental healthcare practitioners, and offer different modalities of healing: https://www.digitalrights.community/blog/community-health-village-2022 You can register to each session separately; and there is a wiki with all the archived material: https://internetfreedomfestival.org/wiki/index.php/Community_Health_Village… To your health! Vesna [1] https://www.netnod.se/blog/technical-communities-resilience-during-covid-19… -- Senior Community Builder, RIPE NCC https://labs.ripe.net/author/becha/

1 0

Two Documents from the Code of Conduct Task Force
by Leo Vegoda 29 Sep '22

29 Sep '22

Dear RIPE community, Earlier today, the Code of Conduct TF published two documents for the community's review. We updated the document describing the Code of Conduct Team's operational procedures based on community input. We have also published a document describing a selection process for the Code of Conduct Team. You can find a blog post summarising the changes and linking to the drafts here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/leo_vegoda/two-documents-from-the-code-of-cond… Please review the documents and share feedback by the end of September. Comments on any aspects of either document are welcome. We're particularly keen to get feedback on the term length for the Code of Conduct Team. Kind regards, Leo Vegoda for the Code of Conduct TF

13 20

NRO NC Nomination Deadline Reminder
by Mirjam Kuehne 23 Sep '22

23 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, There is currently one nominee for the NRO Number Council election. The deadline for nominations is roughly one week away on 30 September. If you are interested in standing for election, please send in your nomination to nominations(a)ripe.net. Detailed information, including the original call for nominees, is available at: https://www.ripe.net//nro-nc/nominations-oct-2022 Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: Meet the New RIPE NCC Executive Board Chair - An Interview with Ondřej Filip
by Karla Liddle-White 21 Sep '22

21 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, With Ondřej Filip having taken on the position of RIPE NCC Executive Board Chair this month, we caught up with him to hear more about his work with the RIPE NCC over the years and his thoughts on his new role: https://labs.ripe.net/author/karla-white/meet-the-new-ripe-ncc-executive-bo… Kind regards, Karla Liddle-White Communications Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

3rd & Final RIPE 85 Call for Submissions
by Brian Nisbet 21 Sep '22

21 Sep '22

Colleagues, While we have received many submissions for the Plenary Programme at RIPE 85 there are still a small number of available slots. With this in mind we are reopening submissions for more excellent content until: Monday 3rd October at 17:00 CEST These proposals should be for plenary sessions and lightning talks. RIPE85 is going to be a hybrid meeting so both in-person and virtual presentations will be accepted and encouraged. Read more about the CfP and submit your presentation proposal at: https://ripe85.ripe.net/submit-topic/cfp/ More about RIPE85 meeting: https://ripe85.ripe.net/ Regards, Brian (On Behalf of the RIPE Programme Committee) Brian Nisbet (he/him) Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

1 0

[meetings] RIPE 87 and RIPE 88 Call for Hosts
by RIPE NCC Event Team 20 Sep '22

20 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, Are you interested in hosting RIPE 87 from 27 November – 1 December 2023, or RIPE 88 from 13 – 17 May 2024? We are looking for organisations within the RIPE NCC service region to submit their proposal for host consideration no later than *11 November 2022*. A RIPE Meeting Host helps with venue scouting, Internet connectivity, social events, finding local sponsors and administrative and on-site support. As a host, we must be able to depend on you to help organise a smooth, professional and top-quality meeting for our attendees. In return, the host organisation enjoys excellent visibility among the RIPE community and the prestige of hosting a RIPE Meeting. Interested? You can find more information at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe-meetings/call-for-host You can send your proposal by *11 November 2022* to: meeting(a)ripe.net. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards, Alexandra Vos Event Organiser

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: Is It Possible for Encryption to Harm Cybersecurity?
by Alun Davies 19 Sep '22

19 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, Andrew Campling gives an update on developments in encrypted DNS and asks whether it’s possible that protocols intended to safeguard privacy might actually have a negative impact on cybersecurity for end users. Read more on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/author/andrew_campling/is-it-possible-for-encryption-… Best regards, Alun Davies RIPE Labs Editor RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [ripe-list] [diversity] Two Documents from the Code of Conduct Task Force
by Cynthia Revström 17 Sep '22

17 Sep '22

Hi, I agree with Keith that it seems appropriate to provide indemnification for the CoC team members (current and past) for their actions on behalf of the CoC team. However I am by no means a lawyer so the NCC Legal team should evaluate if this is feasible and how to implement it. -Cynthia On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 6:05 PM Keith Mitchell <keith(a)smoti.org> wrote: > > On 9/16/22 04:00, Kurtis Lindqvist wrote: > > > >> On 14 Sep 2022, at 20:43, Alex de Joode <alex(a)idgara.nl> wrote: > > >> Those depositions could than be used in court for damage claims > >> (loss of employment, libel/defamation). You can sue RIPE, the event > >> or (individual) members of the CoC. > > > What you are describing (I think) is a situation where the RIPE NCC > > is considered the organiser and the legal home of any activity > > covered by the CoC. In this case the officers implementing the CoC > > would have to be appointed by the RIPE NCC and considered legally > > employed (or covered) by the RIPE NCC and therefor their indemnity > > insurance would cover it and it would be dealt with in the NL. > > Under the RIPE NCC Arbitration process, there is a means by which > community volunteers (who are not NCC employees) are formally > indemnified against potential legal blowback of any decisions they make. > > Parties to the arbitration are required to commit to this when entering > into a dispute resolution. It does seem appropriate that a similar such > indemnification measure should be in place for CoC volunteer officers, > it that is not already envisaged. > > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity(a)ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity

2 1

Communities & Codes of Conduct
by Brian Nisbet 16 Sep '22

16 Sep '22

Good Afternoon, In the last few days there have been a few emails about the draft CoC documents and, without any hat on, I want to address a few things. The RIPE community is special. It's amazing and wonderful and I love it… but also in so many ways, it is not special at all. It is not immune to the issues that have cropped up elsewhere and, importantly, also crop up in RIPE. This may be hard to hear but it's true. There are people who have left our community due to unwelcome attention, incidents of sexual harassment or repeatedly being told - through deeds if not words - that they are not welcome here. Worse are the people who could contribute so much to the operation of the Internet who look at our community, talk with others about it, and simply shake their heads - "That's not a place for me." These are the sad commonalities between communities, these are the ways in which RIPE is decidedly not special. A suitably, carefully, fairly, enforced Code of Conduct is just one of the many ways of making things better. It sets out the norms of behaviour and, importantly, it says "If you come here and people act badly towards you – we want to know about it, we will care, and we will act." If you want, you can think of it like MANRS or similar. It says that as a community, we have thought about things, that we acknowledge the issues we have, and we are working to improve them. This is not a court of law. It is a community driven effort, and so, like every other effort, we put our trust in those who we appoint, while maintaining the ability to course correct, knowing that there are checks and balances. In fact, I'm extremely happy for those that need to make reports that it isn't a court of law, as such courts, in countries around the world, have been seen to be adversarial towards those who seek justice for things like sexual assault. They put great hurt on the victims and have a truly awful record in bringing that justice. But again, this is not a court of law. Nor is it a way to attack the correct (or whatever passes for correct) use of grammar. But it can be a way to improve communications. It can be a way for a community to clearly say "That isn't a good way to interact, especially if we want to be open." There are many, many ways to have robust technical discussion without giving people the impression that their opinions are not wanted, as has happened many times in the past. And we are getting better at this as a community, but a CoC will help us more. As I have said repeatedly over many years, things happen at RIPE Meetings that the community does not, or should not, want to happen. The previous system gave the victims of those things someone to talk to, which is important, but little more than that. A CoC provides a means of recourse, which has been proven to work in communities around the world. There will be a few growing pains, for sure. There will be people who prejudge all of this, who decide that this changes the community too much. It might even cause them to leave. In many cases that will be a great pity and I hope they stick around - but if this prevents others leaving because they feel unsafe, or from being subjected to behaviour that all of us agree is unacceptable, then, well, I know where I'm happier. No process is perfect, we're humans, but this is a really, really good next step (and yes, I would say that, of course). I believe it will make a difference in who joins our community and for how long they stay. I believe it will, in some small way, improve the sector in which we all work. And thankfully my beliefs are backed up by what we've seen in other communities. Importantly, we can do other things at the same time and I look forward to what other new things this community does, and what excellent initiatives it continues, which will make it better for all. I know I will not convince everyone (this is not the first time I've had this discussion in a community, not even in the RIPE community), and I know that a lot of people in the community are convinced (or convinced enough) already, but I didn't want to stay silent on this thread. This is too important for the community right now, and for the future, for those of us here, and those of us we hope will join us. Thanks, Brian Brian Nisbet (he/him) Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

4 4

Re: [ripe-list] [diversity] Two Documents from the Code of Conduct Task Force
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 14 Sep '22

14 Sep '22

Extra points (clicked too fast send) ... very important ones in my opinion, regarding the appointment of CoC Team members. 1) Don't see the need to ask for one person from the community, and it is fair easy to fake (again same point regarding enforcement). 2) I don't agree that the Chair is the one to appoint CoC members. It should be the community (and this will solve 1 above). 3) I even less agree on "own discretion", it is prone o subjectivity, "my friends", etc., we have seen this happening already many times, here and in the IETF. Is not right, and it is discriminatory. Again, 2, solves this. 4) I'm not convinced there is an objective way to judge "emotional intelligence", and even if there is, I feel this is discriminatory, the same as considering age and gender. Again, 2 above, will solve this. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 14/9/22, 12:31, "diversity en nombre de JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <diversity-bounces(a)ripe.net en nombre de jordi.palet(a)consulintel.es> escribió: Hi Leo, all, I've several inputs/questions related to both documents. 1) I understand that if actions on someone are applied, for example, leaving the meeting, and then the appeal is in his/her favor (there was a misunderstanding, false or wrong perception of witness, etc.), there are legal risks if not properly compensated and even publicly recognized the mistake. I think we should have some text on that. 2) I don't agree that the CoC Team, even being different persons, is the right way to take care of possible Appeals. 3) I don't think is right to "permanently" ban anyone. It is like long-term prison, and everyone can make a mistake and correct the situation or his behavior. I understand that this will happen only in expectational circumstances, however, I feel that just having "for a period of time" is a more prudent path. 4) Is not clear to me if someone removed from a f2f event will also be banned from the mailing lists. I understand that not? 5) I don't think it makes any sense to "remove" someone from a virtual event. I will agree in only disallowing him to speak up. 6) Same a 3 above, I don't think anyone can be removed permanently from a mailing list. In fact, if he/she want to keep participating, it is plain easy to create an alternative email and rejoin, even if not posting. Similarly, can happen 5 above. Should we be realistic in what we can enforce? Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 14/9/22, 8:34, "ripe-list en nombre de Leo Vegoda" <ripe-list-bounces(a)ripe.net en nombre de leo(a)vegoda.org> escribió: Dear RIPE community, Earlier today, the Code of Conduct TF published two documents for the community's review. We updated the document describing the Code of Conduct Team's operational procedures based on community input. We have also published a document describing a selection process for the Code of Conduct Team. You can find a blog post summarising the changes and linking to the drafts here: https://labs.ripe.net/author/leo_vegoda/two-documents-from-the-code-of-cond… Please review the documents and share feedback by the end of September. Comments on any aspects of either document are welcome. We're particularly keen to get feedback on the term length for the Code of Conduct Team. Kind regards, Leo Vegoda for the Code of Conduct TF -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. _______________________________________________ diversity mailing list diversity(a)ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/diversity ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: Push the Button - SIDN Lab's DDoS Testbed in Action at CONCORDIA Open Door 2022
by Alun Davies 12 Sep '22

12 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, SIDN Labs have been improving the testbed they developed for the DDoS Clearing House. At the CONCORDIA Open Door event (COD2022) this October, they'll demonstrate how the testbed works as part of the CONCORDIA Threat Intelligence Platform. In this new article on RIPE Labs, the team goes over latest changes to the testbed and plans for COD2022: https://labs.ripe.net/author/thijsvandenhout/push-the-button-sidn-labs-ddos… Best regards, Alun Davies RIPE Labs Editor RIPE NCC

1 0

RIPE Discussion Mailing List Moderation and Archives
by Mirjam Kuehne 09 Sep '22

09 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, In light of recent events on this mailing list, I have put together some thoughts on moderation and a proposed way forward. I will put this topic on the agenda for the RIPE 85 Community Plenary. Context On 22 July, a highly offensive racist email was sent to the RIPE Discussion List. This mail clearly violates the RIPE Code of Conduct. After discussion with the RIPE NCC, we decided to enable moderation on the list. On 23 July, people who had responded to the offender, notably myself, the RIPE NCC’s Chief Community Officer, and another RIPE community member, were sent further offensive mails by this person and were subjected to ‘subscription bombing’ attacks (many thousands of mailing list subscription requests sent to our inboxes). List Moderation All mails sent to <ripe-list(a)ripe.net> have been held for moderation since this incident. They are reviewed by either Niall O’Reilly or myself (as the RIPE Chair Team) before they are allowed through to the list. The RIPE community has always been open to everyone and it has a demonstrated ability to self-govern. We therefore view our decision here as quite a severe one. Nevertheless, we have received a lot of support from community members for these actions. With that support in mind, we propose that we continue with moderation of the list until at least RIPE 85. The moderation queue will be reviewed at least once a day, and together Niall and I will decide how to proceed. If one of us is unavailable, we will coordinate with other community members to ensure that we always have more than one person available to moderate the list. I will also provide a transparency report to keep the community informed of activities and decisions ‘behind the scenes’ (i.e. whether mails have been held/rejected and how many). So far, no mails have been rejected without us first contacting the original sender. This helps to increase understanding of the process. However, it will ultimately be the moderators who decide if a mail is rejected or not. Offensive or Illegal Mails We will remove the mail from 22 July from the RIPE List archives. This message has no content beyond its aim to cause offense. Modifying archives is not something we do lightly. In this case, we believe it is important to avoid the implication that this kind of language is acceptable to us as a community, especially for anyone reading the archives in the future. Rather than simply removing the mail, I asked the RIPE NCC to move the content of the URL in question and replace it with an explanation that makes it clear that a message has been taken out and why. This would also apply to another mail sent in response, as it quoted the offensive mail. We also understand that the offensive email is illegal under Dutch law. Because the RIPE NCC maintains the public archives of our mailing lists, it is regarded as a hosting provider and with this comes an obligation to remove unlawful content from its public infrastructure. Future Archives Some community members have suggested that we set up an ‘unmoderated archive’, which is similar to how the RIPE NCC Member Discussion List is currently set up. I agree that this is a workable solution that supports transparency. It means that the complete archives, including any rejected mails, will be available under a different URL that is separate from the regular RIPE List archives. We propose not indexing these unmoderated archives so they do not appear in search engines. We will also add a warning to this page so that people are informed that they might find rude or offensive content in the unmoderated archives. We believe such an approach is important for transparency, while at the same time avoiding receiving offensive emails that undermine the important work of our community. Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE Chair

5 5

New on RIPE Labs: RIPE Chair Team Report September 2022
by Mirjam Kuehne 07 Sep '22

07 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, In this edition of the RIPE Chair Team Reports, with summer coming to an end and the community gearing up for a busy autumn period, here's a quick update on what we're focusing on this month and a reminder to send in your content proposals for RIPE 85. https://labs.ripe.net/author/mirjam_kuhne/the-ripe-chair-team-reports-septe… Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE Chair

1 0

RIPE Labs article on sanctions and solutions
by Chris Buckridge 07 Sep '22

07 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, We have just published an article on RIPE Labs regarding economic sanctions and related work that the RIPE NCC is engaged in and funding: https://labs.ripe.net/author/chrisb/towards-a-sanctions-solution-space/ The RIPE NCC’s goal here is to improve our situation with regard to sanctions over the long-term, and we’re looking forward to speaking more with the RIPE community about how we can do that. Best regards, Chris Buckridge RIPE NCC

3 2

Country selection criteria for RIPE meetings
by Vasia Pupkin 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

RIPE Chair: Based on what criteria has Serbia - a country that actively supports war in Ukraine - been selected as a host for the upcoming RIPE meeting? Thank you.

4 3

[meetings] Are you ready for RIPE 85?
by RIPE NCC Event Team 05 Sep '22

05 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, RIPE 85 takes place at the Metropol Palace Hotel in Belgrade from 24 - 28 October 2022. If you haven’t yet registered, follow this link to secure your place: https://ripe85.ripe.net/register/ ------------- Ticket Options ------------- Week ticket: EUR 350 Day ticket: EUR 125 Student (week) ticket: EUR 50 Online Attendance: Free! Are you a new LIR? If so, did you know that you have two free tickets to a RIPE Meeting? If you haven’t used them yet, make sure you do for RIPE 85. Find more information at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/member-support/become-a-member/free-ticket… ------------- Call for Presentations ------------- The RIPE Programme Committee (PC) is seeking presentation proposals from the RIPE community for the plenary sessions, BoFs (Birds of a Feather sessions), workshops, tutorials, and lightning talks at RIPE 85. Find out how to submit a proposal at: https://ripe85.ripe.net/cfp/ Proposals must be submitted using the meeting submission system and no later than 11 September. Proposals submitted after this date will be considered on a space-available basis. ------------- RIPE Labs Competition ------------- We're extending the RIPE Labs Article competition deadline by two weeks. If you have something interesting to say about the past, present or future state of the Internet, submit your article by 18 September for a chance to win free tickets, free travel, and free accommodation for RIPE 85. For more information: https://labs.ripe.net/competitions/the-ripe-labs-article-competition-ripe-8… More information on RIPE 85 can be found at: https://ripe85.ripe.net/ Follow us on Facebook and Twitter: @ripemeeting, #RIPE85 Best regards, Alexandra Vos Event Organiser RIPE NCC

1 0

Reminder: NRO NC Call for Nominations
by Hans Petter Holen 01 Sep '22

01 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, This is a reminder that the call for nominations from the RIPE NCC service region to fill one seat on the Number Resource Organization (NRO) Number Council (NC) is open. The three-year term started by Filiz Yilmaz and continued by James Kennedy ends on 31 December 2022. The election for this NRO NC seat will take place during the RIPE 85 Meeting which will be held online and onsite in Belgrade from 24-28 October 2022. All members of the Internet community, except RIR staff, who are attending the RIPE Meeting (online or onsite) and have checked in may vote in the election. The deadline for nominations is Friday, 30 September 2022. Any individual residing within the RIPE NCC service region is eligible for nomination, except RIR staff members. Self-nominations are permitted. The nomination process is available at: https://www.ripe.net/nro-nc/nominations-oct-2022/nro-nc-nomination-process Please send your nominations to <nominations at ripe.net> by 23:59 UTC on 30 September 2022. All confirmed nominations will be listed on the RIPE NCC website by Wednesday, 5 October 2022. All nominees may submit a written statement in support of their nomination for publication on the RIPE NCC website. Other people can express support for nominated individuals by sending an email to <nominations at ripe.net>. Expressions of support will also be published on the RIPE NCC website. Regards, Hans Petter Holen Managing Director RIPE NCC

1 0

RIPE NCC Executive Board Selects New Chair
by Hans Petter Holen 01 Sep '22

01 Sep '22

Dear colleagues, Ondřej Filip has been appointed Chair of the RIPE NCC Executive Board following Christian Kaufmann’s decision to step down as Chairman. Ondřej will serve as Chair from 1 September. He has served on the Board for three years and as Treasurer since 2020. Over the course of his career, he has served on the boards of many Internet-related bodies and has more than 20 years of experience in the telecommunications industry. Christian, who has served as Chairman for four years and as a Board member since 2011, is officially stepping down in September after being selected to serve a three-year term on Seat 10 of the ICANN Board of Directors. To enable a smooth transition, a new Chair has been appointed to allow for a transfer period and Christian will remain a member of the RIPE NCC Executive Board until his term ends in May 2023. With Ondřej’s appointment as Chair, Raymond Jetten will become Treasurer. Piotr Strzyżewski remains as Secretary and Remco van Mook remains as NRO EC representative, while Maria Häll becomes the Community Projects Fund representative. I would like to thank Christian for his work as RIPE NCC Executive Board Chairman and for his time and dedication in serving as a Board member for over a decade. And I look forward to continuing to have an excellent relationship with Ondřej and the rest of the Board. Kind regards, Hans Petter Holen Managing Director RIPE NCC

1 0