|
|
 |
WG Collaboration
-
From: Maria Häll maria@localhost
-
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:53:50 +0200
-
Cc: martin.boyle@localhost, Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost, Paul Rendek rendek@localhost
I also want to say thanks for input, and that Im looking forward
working with this WG.
I'm (still) on vacation, though, and will not be able to read my
office email until end of July.
I'll still have another week of vacation in Aug, but after Aug 18 Im
back "on track" again :-)
Hope you all have a nice summer!
/Maria Häll
From: Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost
Date: må 14 jul 2008 15.10.18 GMT+02:00
Cc: Marin Boyle <martin.boyle@localhost, Maria Häll <maria.hall@localhost
>
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
After input from a number of people (thanks) and discussion with
the proposed working group chairs, here is a new version of the
proposed charter. Changes to the charter specifically include
talking about what this working group is *not* to discuss.
I have heard indirectly that some individuals are not happy with
the name of the wg. I am not married to this name. It was just
something I came up with as we agree we should NOT call it
"enhanced cooperation". If not anyone comes up with a better name,
I propose we live with this for now, and then change the name if
someone comes up with something better. I do not personally want
this discussion on what the name is block the creation of the wg.
We need it, me thinks, in Dubai.
Patrik, holder of the pen
Collaboration Working Group
Suggested chairs:
Martin Boyle, Nominet
Maria Häll, Swedish Government
The RIPE community decision-making processes are open to anyone,
meaning that anyone with an interest can suggest policy, take part
in reviewing documents and participate on mailing lists and at RIPE
Meetings. To encourage participation from people and organisations
outside the traditional RIPE community, a number of special
outreach programs have been developed, including a series of
"Governmental Roundtable Meetings", at which RIPE community members
and government representatives can meet and discuss common areas of
interest. Government representatives participate in RIPE Meetings,
and the RIPE NCC actively reaches out to governments and others in
the public sector to inform them on issues related to the RIPE
community and engage them on issues related to RIPE and RIPE NCC
activities.
The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing
on collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet
matters. This kind of collaboration has taken on increased
prominence in recent years, as the wider Internet community strives
to ensure that all voices are heard and the interests of all
parties are considered. Fostering more open dialogue between all
stakeholders is vital to ensuring the continued stability of the
Internet.
The working group discusses the following:
1. Topics raised by working group participants that are of interest
to both the public and private sectors. Topics are NOT to overlap
with issues discussed in other working groups. This working group
should complement the other working groups.
2. The RIPE NCC's current outreach activities will be reported, and
the RIPE NCC will seek advice and guidance on future activities.
This to make the discussions more focused as the current only forum
is the ripe-list@localhost mailing list.
3. The working group will develop and clarify the RIPE community's
position on issues that are of relevance to the public sector or on
which a community position has been sought. These discussions are
to be more focused in a working group targeted for these kind of
discussions.
4. The working group will be responsible for maintenance of the
RIPE Document produced by the Enhanced Cooperation Task Force,
describing the RIPE community, existing policy development
processes and outreach programs. This working group does explicitly
NOT have change control over the PDP itself, just change control of
the document that describe it.
The working group is also an important channel through which the
RIPE community can communicate with others in the "Information
Society". The chairs are not to become special "Ambassadors" for
RIPE. Their role is the same as other wg chairs at RIPE, which
implies they of course could be asked now and then what the status
of the wg is. The process by which RIPE and RIPE NCC respectively
coordinate with other bodies (such as NRO) and communicate (mostly
via RIPE NCC or the chair of RIPE) is not changing by creation and
existence of this wg.
Begin forwarded message:
From: <michael.dillon@localhost
Date: ti 15 jul 2008 12.00.42 GMT+02:00
Subject: RE: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Collaboration Working Group
If anyone has comments on this proposal, should it be
discussed here on the ripe-list or will there be a
wg list created soon for the discussion?
--Michael Dillon
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost
Date: ti 15 jul 2008 14.51.05 GMT+02:00
To: michael.dillon@localhost
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
On 15 jul 2008, at 12.00, <michael.dillon@localhost <michael.dillon@localhost
> wrote:
Collaboration Working Group
If anyone has comments on this proposal, should it be
discussed here on the ripe-list or will there be a
wg list created soon for the discussion?
The mailing list for the wg is not created before the wg is
created. If you have issues on the wg itself, then you should bring
it up here.
After the wg is created, of course the charter can be discussed,
changed and what not, and that should happen on the wg mailing list.
So I think my question to you is: Do you think this proposed
charter is "good enough" to get things going?
If the answer is "no", then you should bring up the issues here and
now.
Patrik
Begin forwarded message:
From: <michael.dillon@localhost
Date: ti 15 jul 2008 15.47.08 GMT+02:00
Subject: RE: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
So I think my question to you is: Do you think this proposed
charter is "good enough" to get things going?
Yes it is good enough to get started.
I asked the question because I want to invite some people to
participate in the discussion.
--Michael Dillon
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost
Date: ti 15 jul 2008 18.48.04 GMT+02:00
To: <michael.dillon@localhost
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
On 15 jul 2008, at 15.47, <michael.dillon@localhost wrote:
So I think my question to you is: Do you think this proposed
charter is "good enough" to get things going?
Yes it is good enough to get started.
I asked the question because I want to invite some people to
participate in the discussion.
And it also helped me think about what I have suggested :-)
Patrik
Begin forwarded message:
From: "tp" ripe@localhost
Date: on 16 jul 2008 10.27.29 GMT+02:00
To: Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost, ripe-list@localhost
Cc: "Marin Boyle" <martin.boyle@localhost, Maria Häll <maria.hall@localhost
>
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Reply-To: "tp" ripe@localhost
I find the use of public sector, as in
"The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing
on
collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet
matters."
somewhat strange and perhaps misleading.
My (not insignificant) country has a public and a private sector,
and the former
has grown steadily over the past 10 years, encompassing a wide
variety of
services and businesses. To me, public sector means state owned,
state run,
answerable to ministers, as opposed to private sector, run by a
board of
directors, answerable to share holders.
Is this really what you mean? I suspect not.
Tom Petch
Begin forwarded message:
From: Roland Perry roland@localhost
Date: on 16 jul 2008 21.59.51 GMT+02:00
Cc: Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost, Marin Boyle <martin.boyle@localhost
>, Maria Häll <maria.hall@localhost, tp ripe@localhost
>
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
In message <021a01c8e746$54d17800$0601a8c0@localhost>, at 10:27:29
local time, on Wed, 16 Jul 2008, tp ripe@localhost remarked:
I find the use of public sector, as in "The Collaboration Working
Group is a forum for discussion focusing on collaboration between
the private and public sectors on Internet matters." somewhat
strange and perhaps misleading.
My (not insignificant) country has a public and a private sector,
and the former has grown steadily over the past 10 years,
encompassing a wide variety of services and businesses. To me,
public sector means state owned, state run, answerable to
ministers, as opposed to private sector, run by a board of
directors, answerable to share holders.
Is this really what you mean? I suspect not.
There's an old saying that goes something like...
"The World is divided into two sets of people:
Those who divide the world into two sets of people
and
Those who don't"
Multistakeholder discussions often get off to a bad start if too
much time is spent defining rigid boxes to put the stakeholders in.
I would encourage those who wish to see this WG succeed, to think
about ways of expressing the idea that a major objective is
demonstrating outreach from the "traditional RIPE Community" to
"everyone else", but particularly Governments, Regulators and NGOs,
who we are trying to bring into our community.
--
Roland Perry
Public Affairs Officer, RIPE NCC
Begin forwarded message:
From: "tp" ripe@localhost
Date: fr 18 jul 2008 10.21.07 GMT+02:00
, "Roland Perry" roland@localhost
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Reply-To: "tp" ripe@localhost
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roland Perry" roland@localhost
Cc: "Patrik Fältström" patrik@localhost; "Marin Boyle"
<martin.boyle@localhost; "Maria Häll" <maria.hall@localhost
>;
"tp" ripe@localhost
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 9:59 PM
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Multistakeholder discussions often get off to a bad start if too
much
time is spent defining rigid boxes to put the stakeholders in.
I would encourage those who wish to see this WG succeed, to think
about
ways of expressing the idea that a major objective is demonstrating
outreach from the "traditional RIPE Community" to "everyone else",
but
particularly Governments, Regulators and NGOs, who we are trying to
bring into our community.
Right. That to me is a much clearer, and likely to be more
fruitful, expression
of what this proposed working group is about than the term 'Public
sector'.
I see quite a lot of this kind of activity and often see it
designated
'outreach' which might be a name for it here.
Tom Petch
--
Roland Perry
Public Affairs Officer, RIPE NCC
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrik Fältström patrik@localhost
Date: fr 18 jul 2008 13.21.51 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: Proposed new working group: Collaboration
Given the input regarding the wording "public sector", I have now
changed the first bullet.
Patrik
Collaboration Working Group
Suggested chairs:
Martin Boyle, Nominet
Maria Häll, Swedish Government
The RIPE community decision-making processes are open to anyone,
meaning that anyone with an interest can suggest policy, take part
in reviewing documents and participate on mailing lists and at RIPE
Meetings. To encourage participation from people and organisations
outside the traditional RIPE community, a number of special
outreach programs have been developed, including a series of
"Governmental Roundtable Meetings", at which RIPE community members
and government representatives can meet and discuss common areas of
interest. Government representatives participate in RIPE Meetings,
and the RIPE NCC actively reaches out to governments and others in
the public sector to inform them on issues related to the RIPE
community and engage them on issues related to RIPE and RIPE NCC
activities.
The Collaboration Working Group is a forum for discussion focusing
on collaboration between the private and public sectors on Internet
matters. This kind of collaboration has taken on increased
prominence in recent years, as the wider Internet community strives
to ensure that all voices are heard and the interests of all
parties are considered. Fostering more open dialogue between all
stakeholders is vital to ensuring the continued stability of the
Internet.
The working group discusses the following:
1. Primary task for this working group is to discuss outreach from
the "traditional RIPE Community" to "everyone else", but
particularly Governments, Regulators and NGOs, who we are trying to
bring into our community. Topics are NOT to overlap with issues
discussed in other working groups. This working group should
complement the other working groups.
2. The RIPE NCC's current outreach activities will be reported, and
the RIPE NCC will seek advice and guidance on future activities.
This to make the discussions more focused as the current only forum
is theripe-list@localhost mailing list.
3. The working group will develop and clarify the RIPE community's
position on issues that are of relevance to the public sector or on
which a community position has been sought. These discussions are
to be more focused in a working group targeted for these kind of
discussions.
4. The working group will be responsible for maintenance of the
RIPE Document produced by the Enhanced Cooperation Task Force,
describing the RIPE community, existing policy development
processes and outreach programs. This working group does explicitly
NOT have change control over the PDP itself, just change control of
the document that describe it.
The working group is also an important channel through which the
RIPE community can communicate with others in the "Information
Society". The chairs are not to become special "Ambassadors" for
RIPE. Their role is the same as other wg chairs at RIPE, which
implies they of course could be asked now and then what the status
of the wg is. The process by which RIPE and RIPE NCC respectively
coordinate with other bodies (such as NRO) and communicate (mostly
via RIPE NCC or the chair of RIPE) is not changing by creation and
existence of this wg.
|
|
|
|
