It has also come up during the RIPE NCC Consultation Report :
"In terms of transparency, respondents asked why there was no election to choose the new RIPE Chair. Respondents noted that they were very supportive of the new RIPE Chair but that they would have liked to have been involved in the process by which he was selected."
Looking back, the RIPE community have a couple election procedures already. The first one put in place was the procedure to elect the RIPE NCC Executive Board when RIPE NCC separated from TERENA and to become a separate legal entity. See the RIPE NCC Articles of Association , Article 9.1 Executive Board: Appointment, Suspension and Dismissal.
We are always careful to state that the RIPE community is bigger than the RIPE NCC membership - but the principles of the process has been established by the community - so we are not completely strangers to elections and voting.
Since then, we have also introduced voting to select the NRO NC members (serving as ICANN ASO Address Council). First time in 1999 when I was elected to the first Address Council - done by paper ballot for those present in the room at the RIPE Meeting at the time of the election .
With the introduction of the Programme Committee, elections are done electronically, which draws more votes than the paper ballot in a room at the meeting. The introduction of electronic voting at the RIPE NCC General Assembly has also increased the number of votes significantly.
The essence of the RIPE NCC Executive Board election procedure is that there is an open call for nominations for no less than six weeks and closes three weeks before the election, and you need written support by five others in order to be nominated.
The remaining piece in the puzzle is to define “the RIPE community” in order to determine who can vote. As we are somewhat related to the IETF, we can go to their procedures and look at RFC 3777 which sets their criteria for being elected to their NOMCOM to participating in three out of the five last IETF meetings.
It is however possible to participate in the RIPE community without being present at meetings. We may want to consider adding a criteria to include those participating on mailing lists.
In order to make the process well known in the community, I will suggest that we use the same process for both selecting the RIPE Chair and the NRO NC members. This has the advantage of reducing the number of different procedures to understand but it also gives us an opportunity to beta test the mechanics of the procedure before it is used for the RIPE Chair election.
So, putting the pieces together, we get the following high level procedure:
I have discussed this with the RIPE NCC staff involved in the other elections and they have been kind to write a more detailed proposal.
The RIPE Chair represents you, the RIPE community. This community has been, and always will be, driven bottom up and by consensus. Your ideas and input form the foundation of what this selection procedure will look like.
Key questions for a procedure are:
* Who can be selected as RIPE Chair
* Who will select the RIPE Chair
* How will the selection happen?
Should we have an election? Decided by a show of hands at a RIPE
Meeting? Evoting? A selection panel? A vetting process by the RIPE Working Group
Chairs? Should there be a RIPE Vice Chair?
Your involvement and consensus on the selection procedure is crucial.
We've established a dedicated mailing list for this discussion:
To subscribe to the list, please visit