RARE and RIPE - the past
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 15:43:15 +0200
- Address: Kruislaan 409, P.O. Box 41882, 1009 DB Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Organisation: Nikhef-H (National Institute for Nuclear and High-Energy Physics)
- Phone: +31 20 5925102, +31 20 6924218 (home)
- Telefax: +31 20 5925155
- Telex: 10262 hef nl
The following are my personal comments. The do not reflect an 'official'
RIPE opinion.
The comments are all aimed at correcting some factual information.
Other types of comment are in a seperate message.
Rob Blokzijl
*
* COA (92)080
* T.Kalin
* 24.8.92
*
*
*
* RARE and RIPE / RIPE - NCC
*
*
* 1. INTRODUCTION
*
* 2. RIPE and RIPE NCC
*
*
* RIPE has now been in operation, following an initiative by D. Karrenberg
* and R. Blokzijl, for three years as the organisation forum where most of
* the European IP networks meet to discuss issues of common interest.
* Currently over 60 networking organisations participate in the work of
* RIPE.
*
A better description of ancient history is the following:
1. Early 1989 the CCIRN defined an action point for Francois Fluckiger
(CERN): try to organize IP coordination in Europe.
2. RARE decided not to take the initiative.
3. An informal meeting was organized by a number of networking
organisations.
4. The meeting decided to set up an IP coordination forum, named RIPE.
From the minutes of that meeting:
Participants:
Anders Hillbo NORDUnet/KTH - Sweden
Peter Merdian BelW"u/Stuttgart - Germany
Ruediger Volk Uni Dortmund/Eunet-D - Germany
Arnold Nipper Uni Karlsruhe - Germany
Olivier Martin CERN - Switzerland
Thomas Lenggenhager SWITCH - Switzerland
Piet Beertema EUnet/CWI - Netherlands
Daniel Karrenberg EUnet/CWI - Netherlands
Francis Dupont INRIA - France
Ives Devillers INRIA - France
Antonio Blasco Bonito CNUCE-CNR - Italy
Federico Ruggieri INFN/Bari - Italy
Rob Blokzijl NIKHEF/HEPnet - Netherlands
Marten Terpstra NIKHEF - Netherlands
As a working title for the activities the meeting adopted the
name RIPE (Reseaux IP Europeens)
All agree on the fact that there should be someone to monitor the
progress of RIPE. Rob Blokzijl is appointed as volunteer.
*
* During the CoA meting in Killarney in May 1990, the decision was made:
*
* 16-13"to adopt RIPE as the coordinating body for the TCP/IP with the terms
* of reference as published and to confirm Rob Blokzijl as its first
* chairman."
*
* Its status was defined as:
*
* "......The RIPE status within RARE is foreseen as a coordinating body,
* which shall be treated as a Working Group in the sense of support provided
* and invitations to CoA and WG Chair-REC meetings...."
*
This is a very simplified version of a discussion that took place, and
the decission that was reached, at that time. A more elaborate
description is given in my report to RIPE, which was the basis for the
discussion in RARE CoA. The principles described in my report where
fully accepted. The two paragraphs above give a too short version,
fore the full version below:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> as has been reported to you the RARE CoA in its meeting in Vienna at
> the end of January this year discussed RIPE and the possible relationship
> between RIPE and RARE. This resulted in the following decissions by the
> CoA:
>
> 1. "RARE without putting into question its OSI policy, recognises the
> TCP/IP family of protocols as an open multi-vendor suite, well adapted to
> scientific and technical applications, which offers some facilities
> needed by part of the RARE user community that are not available with
> OSI today."
>
> 2. "RARE intends to ensure that coordination of TCP/IP in Europe is
> carried out as effectively as possible, by coming rapidly to a suitable
> arrangement with RIPE, the existing ad hoc TCP/IP coordination group,
> following the proposal by RIPE to RARE."
>
>
> The `proposal by RIPE to RARE' is a reference to the letter from RIPE to
> RARE, announcing the existence of RIPE and stating that RIPE is not to be
> viewed as a competing organisation. The relevent paragraphs in that letter
> read:
>
> --------------------begin of quote------------------------------------------
>
> I would like to stress that RIPE should not be viewed in any way as a
> competitor to any existing European networking effort. RIPE tries to bundle
> the existing wide area IP networks in Europe and come to agreements
> regarding common management practices. As can be read in the terms of
> reference, RIPE does not regard itself as a network provider.
>
> The composition of the current group of participating organisations is
> diverse: regional networks, national networks and international networks can
> all be found there. However, they all have one common characteristic: they
> are offering IP services to their users today, or are planning to do so in
> the near future. It is the view of RIPE that IP coordination can, in a
> practical way, only be done by the IP networks themselves.
>
> As I stated before, RIPE should not be viewed as a competing or dissenting
> organisation. It is the view of RIPE that the community of network users in
> Europe would be best served by bringing the RIPE work under the `umbrella'
> of RARE. But this would need a policy statement by the RARE COA regarding IP
> networks in Europe. In the past RARE has never been involved with any of the
> existing network services in Europe (like DECnet or SNA). If RARE wishes to
> be involved with the ongoing IP coordination, then in our opinion a
> discussion on the principles of such an involvement should take place at the
> next RARE COA meeting.
>
> Therefore the organisations cooperating in RIPE request that the issue of IP
> coordination in Europe be placed on the agenda of the next COA meeting, and
> that the enclosed material be distributed among the COA members beforehand.
>
> ----------------------end of quote------------------------------------------
>
> At the RARE Executive Committee (REC) meeting of March 16 the REC decided
> that a RARE delegation should start talks with RIPE to come to the proposed
> arrangement, acceptable to both RIPE and the RARE CoA. This delegation
> consists of Kees Neggers (present treasurer, future vice-chairman of RARE)
> and Christian Michau (future REC member).
>
> A first meeting between the REC delegation and the spokesman of RIPE took
> place on April 2 in Brussels where various aspects of a possible arrangement
> were discussed.
>
> A report of this discussion now follows. The various points are taken in no
> particular order.
>
> 1. The name of the game stays the same: RIPE has acquired in its short life
> already a high visibility and one should not create unnecessary confusion
> by changing names of activities too often.
>
> 2. RIPE consists of a cooperation of wide area IP networking providers.
> These are:
> - international networks
> - national networks
> - regional networks
> - commercial organisations
>
> 3. RIPE participants do their work within a `consencus' model, every
> participant being equally equal.
>
> 4. RIPE decides on its organisational form, its mode of working, its
> chairman, etc.
>
> 5. RIPE does not concern itself with the introduction of or the migration to
> OSI networking. RIPE does concern itself with integration of OSI
> services.
>
> 6. RIPE keeps contacts with IP networks outside Europe on a peer to peer
> basis.
>
> 7. Most of the above mentioned points are covered by the RIPE Terms of
> Reference. It would be only natural if this document remains unchanged in
> a future arrangement between RIPE and RARE.
>
> Assuming that the above points are accepted by RIPE and RARE as the bases
> for future collaboration, and the discussion in Brussels suggested that this
> could be the case, there remains to define the exact relationship between
> the two.
>
> One can think of various models of relationship. The most simple one that
> comes to my mind is the one where RARE invites RIPE to continue its work as
> a special project group within RARE. That would avoid remodelling RIPE as a
> RARE working group (not acceptable, see above). RARE would have to accept
> the current Terms of Reference of RIPE and its current mode of working.
> RARE would appoint a REC member as responsible for IP matters, that person
> would be expected to attend RIPE meetings.
>
> RIPE would expect the RARE secretarial support that is normal for working
> groups, plus some additional support for the technical work of RIPE,
> including a travel budget for meetings where RIPE represents the IP
> interests of RARE.
>
>
> I put this proposal up for discussion among the current RIPE participants
> (ripe-org@localhost) and the appointed REC members (Kees Neggers
> neggers@localhost and Christian Michau ucir059@localhost).
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob Blokzijl
> (RIPE Spokesman)
*
* It is safe to claim that RIPE did fulfil its objectives and contributed
* extensively to the growth and success of the European IP networks, we are
* experiencing now.
*
The 'growth' of IP networking has never a been an objective of RIPE.
The 'succes' certainly is!
*
* RIPE - NCC is part of the RARE Secretariat.
*
This means:
- RIPE NCC personel is employed by RARE
- RIPE NCC personel follows the RARE 'house rules'
- RIPE NCC budget is administered by RARE financial staff
It does not mean:
- RIPE NCC is 'owned' or 'governed' by RARE
*
* 3. RARE AND RIPE
*
*
* 4. CONCLUSION: ROLE OF RIPE AND RIPE NCC IN THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
*
* RIPE:
*
* RIPE should stay a technical IP coordinating body within RARE, but
* having much more interaction with the RARE management, technical and
* executive bodies (CoA, RTC, REC, Raresec) than in the past
Correction:
- RIPE has never been a body within RARE, in the sense that a RARE WG
(either old or new style) is a body of RARE
* according to its charter, RIPE should be serving wider population than
* RARE membership
Correction:
- RIPE is serving a much wider population than RARE membership, and it has
done so from the start of RIPE
