Plenary Minutes RIPE 31

[RIPE NCC Meeting Registration <]

               31st RIPE Meeting Plenary Minutes - DRAFT


                                RIPE 31
                Edinburgh, 23, 24 and 25 September 1998
                            Plenary Session 


   Chair: Rob Blokzijl
   Scribe: Naomi de Bruyn/Mirjam Kuehne


         1. Opening

         2. Agenda

         3. Minutes RIPE 30

         4. From the Chair (Rob Blokzijl)

         5. Report from the RIPE NCC (Mirjam Kuehne)

         6. RIPE NCC 1999 Activity Plan (Daniel Karrenberg)

         7. RIPE NCC 1998 Annual general Meeting (Keith Mitchell)

         8. Some aspects of the new IANA (Dave Crocker)

         9. New IANA: Progress reports (RIPE, RIPE NCC, CENTR)

        10. European CERT Activities (Brian Gilmore)

        11. Merit Post Routing Arbiter Activities (Gerald Winters)

        12. Reports from the Working Groups

        13. Next meetings

        14. AOB

        15. Close


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 - 1. - Opening

      Rob Blokzijl opened the plenary session of the 31st RIPE meeting.

 - 2. - Agenda

      The agenda was approved as advertised. These minutes follow the
      agenda.

 - 3. - Minutes RIPE 30

      The minutes of RIPE 30 were approved as they had been circulated before
      the meeting. No comments/additions.

 - 4. - From the chair

      Rob Blokzijl thanked the organization.


 - 5. - Report from the RIPE NCC (Mirjam Kuehne)

        http://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/ripe-31/pres/ncc-report/index.html

        Q: When will the RIPE NCC report on Y2 compliance 
        A: Maldwyn Morris: we start testing after RIPE 31 meeting in a couple 
           of weeks time. As soon as we know what to do we will put a report 
           on the web.

        Q: It might be useful to have more info on query statistics, not only 
           how much but also on domain and Inetnums etc. also where domain 
           would be delegated, whether change would be accepted or not. 
        A: Daniel Karrenberg (Dfk): we will work on something.

        Q: Pgp authentication. Last meeting NCC said we had license for pgp. 
        A: Joao Damas: we are finishing procedures, we'll be reviewing them 
           and let everyone know. You will need to have a mntner object, you 
	   have to request that. It will check if you actually have a mntner 
           object, we'll register it when we actually get the license.  
           Details will be published in a few weeks.

        Q: did the NCC get much comments about problems with net66 
           allocations? 
        A: Mirjam Kuehne: we have not had much feedback lately, in the 
	   beginning we constantly talked to people. Are frequently seeing 
           customers with fire-walls get on-authorized requests. 

*       Routing group discussion: signal queries versus 
        Dfk we are doing that. Will not show.

 - 6. - RIPE NCC 1999 Activities and expenditure (Daniel Karrenberg)

        Q: what about using the web for payments? 
        A: Dfk: we do have membership payments by credit card. People are 
           reminded that this is not prefered, preferably by bank. 
           It could be a way to improve no-payments of regular fees and meeting
           fees. 

	Do people want the ncc to get a secure webserver? Hear a lot of yes. 
        Pgp could be a potential solution? Maldwyn Morris will put the 
        ripe-141 request form on web, we want to also use pgp for that, so the 
        two might come together. Dfk: we will look into various things.

	Q: Procedure for re-allocating address space. 
        A: Dfk we have a procedure at the moment, taking space away is not the
	   prime objective. During some stage we look at whether there are 
           announcements. This usually does not result in taking space away, 
           can't do anything about the routing other then talking to the 
           upstreams. At the very end of the procedure might take away inaddr.

	   Not as effective as taking away routing but will work. Haven't 
           reached those stages yet. As a first step take we do not take the 
           already assigned address space. Only the space that was not 
           assigned yet, we will formally take back. We don't want to 
           hurt the users.

	Q: RIPE NCC gives address space to a LIR but if that LIR then assigns 
           that address space to a 'user' we must try not to hurt that user. 
           Hard to see the business part in that, trying to understand the 
           explanation. 
	A: Dfk: we don't lease. We have allocations and assignments. In our 
           registration procedures there is a formal step, we give 
	   allocations. But nobody but a LIR can give assignments. They cannot
           allocate. The assignments hold and the allocation is taken back. 


 - 7. - RIPE NCC 1998 Annual General Meeting (Keith Mitchell)

        Keith asked contributors present to please attend the AGM,
        which will take place at Amsterdam Schiphol Hilton. 

        Discussed will be the fact that we need to make sure we have one 
        AGM meeting a year instead of 2. Furthermore we plan to discuss
        the budget and the fees that come out of that budget. 
        Important also is the election of candidates/board members. 

 - 8. - EUROCERT. European Incident Response coordination service.
        (Brian Gilmore. Vice president of technical programme of TERENA)

        http://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/ripe-31/pres/euro-cert/index.html

        Q: What is the level of contribution you would expect of an ISP
        A: 10.000 ECU as a sign-up fee. Terena expects to hand over this to 
           someone else. A hot topic currently for discussion is to where it 
	   should go, to Dante? Or Ukerna (?) This will be discussed during 
	   contributors committee meeting next week.

 - 9. - Merit Post Routing Arbiter Activities (Gerald Winters)

        'Post-Routing Arbiter Merit Activities'
        Gerald Winters, Graig Labovitz Merit network Inc.

http://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/ripe-31/pres/merit/index.html

 - 10. - Some aspects of the new IANA (Dave Crocker)
         Level 10 Routing Long Division and Irrational Factions

http://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/ripe-31/pres/level-10-routing/index.html

         Dave Crocker gave some history about technical and managerial issues
         that led to the current debate about the IANA.

         NSF made the initial mistake to hand over a revenue stream to NSI, of
         course NSI is now trying hard to keep it, and others try to get a part
         of the pie.

         Authority was given to IANA by the community, funding was given by the
         US government. The US government funding should have stoped earlier 
         and taken over by the community. The discussion started by the US 
         government by their green paper de-stabelised the Internet 
         administration.

         He then described the process of the ad hoc committee that was set up
         to built new gTLDs. Also here, a few mistakes were made, even though
         many good principles were in the structure (not-for profit registries,
         independent oversight committees etc.).

         After that work had been done, it has been discovered that the world
         had changed. There were constructive discussions in the technical
         community. But there were also new players that had never heard of the
         Internet before but had much influence in the White House and that
         wanted to have a part of the pie.

         Which mistakes were made in this process: 
         - technical community ended up in political discussions, where 
           they were only used to hold technical debates.

         People who could not build the Internet, were trying to take it over. 

         Dave Crockers says: we like to say "We are only technicians, not 
         politicians" But in fact we created a social order, globally, that 
         works for this type of technical activities. It is now under social 
         threat.

         We do have influence and we should use it (difference between the
         green and the white paper shows that this works). The current set of
         bylaws (version 4) guarantee that no useful activity can happen for
         the next years, it is much too complicated to be implemented.

         The community can change things, but not with being polite!


 - 11. - New IANA: Progress reports (RIPE, RIPE NCC, CENTR)

	Keith Mitchell (chairman of RIPE NCC board)
	He has been very disappointed about the process and about the many 
	unconstructive people involved in discussion, without taking the fact 
	into account that we have a deadline to meet.

	He also critises the IFWP process (attended two of their meetings), 
	main issues were domain name issues. Address issues were put aside 
	(being ignored) 
	
	Critises that wrap-up meeting was closed, this was then not going 
	to happen and took place anyway. Then the NSI and IANA joined set of 
	bylaws came out under strange circumstances.

	Points out a few details of the current draft (can be found on NCC 
	reaction, see www.ripe.net/news/). In particular the focus on a 
	membership organisation; user community is represented in too many 
	places compared to other technical representation (through at large 
	board members and through individual membership in the supporting 
	organisations).

	What can we do:
	1. common statement from this community (including various groups)
	2. put names forward for the at large board members other than that 
	   he is worried that the whole process will be run by US government.

	Randy Bush added one correction: there was not only discussion between
	NSI and IANA, but also between NSI and US government.
	And another possibility of influencing the procedure is to involve the 
	European Commission.

	Niall O'Reilly as the representative of the CENTR group added to that 
	that also CENTR has sent out a reaction to the current set of IANA 
	bylaws. This covered most of the facts that were also mentioned in the
	RIPE NCC reaction.

	Daniel Karrenberg adds to the discussion that he received a mail from 
	Jon Postel who said that the IANA received the reactions from this 
	community and listend to them. They are currently working very hard to
	put out a new version very soon.

	Hans Peter Holen asks if one possibility would be to dicuss here or in
	a small group concrete suggestions for changes. Come and speak to him 
	any time, RIPE NCC is coordinating it.

	Frode Greisen suggests that the RIPE community brings out a resolution
	that says that the IANA should go back to version 3 of the bylaws. 

	Q: Did the US government discuss the issue with other governments?
	Dfk: knows that they are discussing certainly with the EC and also with
	other governments.

	Keith Mitchell supports Frode Greisens suggestions. Send out statement
	'go back to version 3, it wasn't broken, don't fix it.' 

	Randy Bush supports the idea and suggests that RIPE together with the 
	RIPE NCC and CENTR produces this statement, this would make it 
	stronger. This idea was supported by the participants.

 - 12. - Reports from the Working Groups

         Database WG
         -----------
         Chair: Wilfried Woeber
         Scribe: Ambrose Magee
         Participants: 50


         EIX WG
         ------
         Chair: Keith Mitchell keith@localhost
         Scribe: Kevin Hoadley

         Netnews WG
         ----------
         Chair: Felix Kugler
         Scribes: Petra Zeidler/Stefan Sticht
         Attendees: 50

         LIR WG
         ------
         Chair: Hans Peter Holen hph@localhost
         Scribe:  Julia Edwards

         Many thanks to Mike Norris for his long lasting contribution as
         the LIR Working Group chair and for chairing this meeting!

         Q: what is the distribution robot?
         A: When one sends a mail to hostmaster@localhost, you don't get 
            in touch with human, but with a robot. Address allocations will 
            be automatically checked.

         TLD WG
         ------
         Chair: Niall O'Reilly
         Scribe: Lars-Johan Liman
         Attendees: 68  

         Routing WG - DSTF 
         -----------------
         Chair: Joachim Schmitz
         Scribe: Mirjam Kuehne, Julia Edwards
         Attendees: 99

         Report from the RPSL Tutorial 
         http://www.isi.edu/ra/rps/training

         Reports on RPSL Deployment
         http://www.isi.edu/ra/rps/transition

         DSTF
         ----
         Topics 
         PGP implementation
         Draft-zsako-ripe-dbsec-pgp-authent-00.txt

         Discussion of RPS auth draft
         Draft-ietf-rps-auth-01.txt

         Project for prefix/origin authentication
         Implementation in the RIPE database software

         Anti-SPAM WG
         ------------
         Chair: James Aldridge
         Scribe: Petra Zeidler

         Q: Will there be any recommendations on whether there wil be any 
            code of conduct for relay. 
	 A: ISPs should approach their customers. 
            The providers have relationships with their customers, the 
	    working group will not go after them.


         Mbone WG
         --------
         Chair: Kurt Kayser
         Scribe: Ronnie Mackenzie
         Attendees: 68

         DNS WG
         ------
         Chair: Ruediger Volk

         Ipv6
         ----
         Chair: David Kessens 
         Scribe: Mirjam Kuehne
         Attendees: 80

         Q: What is the current status of RIPE Ipv6 address assignment 
            input from ncc 
         A: Action: will start in January 1999


 - 13. - Next meetings:

	RIPE 32: January 27-29 1999, Amsterdam
	RIPE 33: May 1999, Vienna
	RIPE 34: September 1999, Amsterdam
	RIPE 35: January 2000, Amsterdam

 - 14. - A.O.B.

	Version 4 draft of the bylaws of the new IANA organization;
        Rob: the wording of the text will be done by the chair and input from
	Niall O'Reilly. No comment from people present.

	More than 240 people registered for this meeting.
	We all thank Edinburgh University for their hospitality and 
	especially Keith Mitchell and his colleagues for providing 
	these excellent facilities!

 - 15. - Close