Dear contributors, dear colleagues, the final state of commitments on December 2nd was just short of ECU 40k coming from 44 sources. Thank you all! Organisation name Person commit (ECU) pi.se AB Pontus Ekman 1000 ACONET Wilfried Woeber 1000 RedIRIS-CSIC Victor Castelo 1000 Academic Computer Centre, CYFRONET-KRAKO Karol Franczak 500 IPGlobal, Informatica e Telecomunicacoes Pedro Ramalho Carlos 500 Teleport C&S GmbH. Christoph Maerk 500 BT Public Internet Service Nigel Roy Titley 1000 Tele Greenland Michael Schultz 1000 SpaceNet GmbH Sebastian v. Bomhard 750 Unisource Business Networks Italy Mauro Magrassi 1000 Sontheimer Datentechnik GmbH Bernd Sontheimer 500 ECRC GmbH Dave Morton 1000 Tele2/SWIPnet Jorgen Ericsson 1000 Nacamar Klaus Landefeld 1000 SIBS - Sociedade Interbancaria de Servic Jose Eduardo Pina Mi 1000 LITNET Daiva Tamulioniene 500 INRIA Annie Renard 500 EUnet Communications Services BV Per Gregers Bilse 1500 HogiaNet Kenneth Hybner 1000 AT&T Internet Services Tankut Turhan, Henk 1000 CESNET Pavel Vachek 500 OTEnet S.A. Theodore Thanopoulos 1000 HEAnet John Hayden 1000 U-NET Limited Stuart Muckley 500 Telia AB J=F6rgen I Larsson 1000 GTN Andreas Baess 1000 INS GmbH Andreas Frackowiak 1000 NASK - Research and Academic Network in Krzysztof Silicki 500 Xlink Michael Rotert 1000 Entreprise des Postes et Telecommunicati Thierry Coutelier 500 HPT - Croatian Post and Telecomm, Teleco Ivan Sedinic 1000 Unisource Business Networks (Schweiz) AG Philip Bridge 1000 Clinet Heikki Suonsivu 1000 InComA Ltd. Gregory Dmitriev 1000 Internet ProLink Mickey Coggins 500 MAZ Internet Services Rainer Lillge 1000 IFS Daniel David 1000 Unisource Business Networks NL bv Rob Reitsma 1000 Global One Sweden Eric Malmstrom 1000 LF.net GmbH i.G. Kurt Jaeger 500 NLnet Services bv Aris Doelman 1000 Transpac France/Global One Bernard Malaval 2000 I.NET S.p.A Marco Negri 1000 Telecom Finland Pasi-Mikko Rautanen 1000 ----- Total: 39250 ===== This represents just 10% of the current contributors and about a quarter of the amount we considered necessary to justify the project as proposed in ripe-150. From this we have to conclude that at this time there is not enough interest in the service among our current constituency to justify such an ambitious pilot service carried out at the RIPE NCC. I have therefore withdrawn the NCC's proposal. Obviously there is some disappointment because we would have liked to do the job. On the other hand I am quite happy that we did not embark on this project with very short preparation only to find out then that the support was less than expected. We will let you know when TERENA has decided about the award of the SIRCE project. You can then consider supporting the particular effort TERENA will select. I'd also like to thank the 51 people who responded to the questionnaire. Here are the results: n % 51 100 Total 47 92 STI likes that NCC asks feedback this way 46 90 ST9 We are satisfied with current NCC services 44 86 STG questionanaire easy to understand 35 69 STA RIPE should start security coord WG 35 69 ST4 have looked at ripe-150 (proposal) 26 51 ST6 not enough time to consider 22 43 ST5 should have been discussed at RIPE meeting 11 22 STB do not contribute because too vague 11 22 ST2 SIRCE needed in a couple of years 9 18 STF TERENA involvement makes it too complicated 9 18 STE do not contribute because too expensive 7 14 STD do not contribute because we do not need it 6 12 STJ do not contribute until selctin process complete 4 8 ST1 SIRCE not needed at this time 3 6 STC do not contribute because NCC not the right place 3 6 ST8 NCC should not start new services 3 6 ST7 NCC should not do incident coordination 0 0 STH questionnaire took too much time 0 0 ST3 SIRCE not useful at all This further supports that the SIRCE service is currently not perceived as very urgent by many ISPs but that it may become more important in the future. A clear lesson I personally have learned from this is that the consensus building process within RIPE and the NCC contributors committee is a delicate one which takes time and careful consideration by all concerned. It is a good process which has served us very well so far. I will take great care to respect it better than I did in this particular matter. The NCC team and I will now do our best to increase the number of you who are saisfied with our current services from a good 90% to as near to 100% as we can make it. Regards D. Karrenberg