From robachevsky at isoc.org Sun May 15 23:13:22 2016 From: robachevsky at isoc.org (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 23:13:22 +0200 Subject: [bcop] MANRS BCOP document In-Reply-To: <56573B11.9060005@isoc.org> References: <56573B11.9060005@isoc.org> Message-ID: <5738E672.4030704@isoc.org> Colleagues, I'd like to update you on the progress our group made in shaping up the MANRS BCOP document and share with you the latest version. This is work in progress, but we felt it was important to show it to you and get your feedback and suggestions. You can find the document here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fQxknkC3_ggdNnPF3NfaWFpmc4ajTonVQIiD9DYBhlg/edit?usp=sharing We also plan to present this work also at the RIPE BCOP TF on May 23 during the RIPE meeting. We welcome your review and contributions. Regards, Andrei, on behalf of the MANRS BCOP team Andrei Robachevsky wrote on 26/11/15 18:02: > Colleagues, > > Following Job's presentation "MANRS Implementation Document" at the BCOP > TF at RIPE71 last week > (https://ripe71.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/bcop-tf/), we corralled > a group of volunteers to move this project forward. > > Folks that agreed to help and share their experience are: Brian J. > Foust, Aaron Hughes, Will van Gulik and Aris Lambrianidis. Thank you! > > Of course Job and I will continue to shoulder this effort. > > To continue discussions and produce a draft document for wider review we > created a mailinglist: > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/manrs-bcop. Feel free to > subscribe if you are interested! > > Otherwise - stay tuned. > > Regards, > > Job and Andrei > > Job Snijders wrote on 29/10/15 17:41: >> Hi all, >> >> We discussed this idea a few times before and I think agreed that it'd >> be a good idea to have a more precise guidance for the implementation of >> MANRS Actions. >> >> As I can see, it will serve at least two purposes: >> >> - Ease deployment of measures required by MANRS (we are talking here >> about stub networks or small providers - the majority of ASNs) >> - Help checking if the network setup is compliant with MANRS >> >> From my discussions with operators at various meetings where Andrei >> Robachevsky presented MANRS it was also quite clear that such guidance >> for the MANRS "package" would be appreciated, also to be able to assess >> what it takes to become MANRS-compliant. >> >> So, Andrei and I took a stab at an outline of such document. It really >> has only a structure and is lacking content with examples, etc. at the >> moment. Help is needed! >> >> We put it as a Google doc, all of you should be able to edit it, so >> please help with some stuff. Even if it is a raw material - such input >> would be appreciated. >> >> The document is here: >> >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FQAVawGGvb-xqNLeGLk05h5nuu0FSS_9KLv6gBaWcJI/edit?usp=sharing >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Job From benno at NLnetLabs.nl Tue May 17 12:20:57 2016 From: benno at NLnetLabs.nl (Benno Overeinder) Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 12:20:57 +0200 Subject: [bcop] RIPE 72 BCOP Task Force draft agenda Message-ID: Hi all, The RIPE 72 BCOP Task Force session is scheduled for Monday May 23th, 18:00-19:00. The draft agenda is: Where: Main room ? A. Administrative Matters and Agenda Bashing [5 min], Benno and Jan ? B. Report on what's going on in LAC and Africa region re BCOP [10 min], Jan Zorz ? C. BCOP on DNS operations [15 min], Markus de Br?n ? D. MANRS BCOP update [15 min], Andrei Robachevsky and Job Snijders ? E. Open Microphone Session: Ideas for New BCOPs and Volunteering We still have a slot available for pitching an idea on documenting best operational practices. See you in Copenhagen, Jan Zorz & Benno Overeinder -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ From benno at NLnetLabs.nl Tue May 17 12:37:00 2016 From: benno at NLnetLabs.nl (Benno Overeinder) Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 12:37:00 +0200 Subject: [bcop] call for presentations RIPE 72 BCOP Task Force Message-ID: <773B3822-9615-48A6-AD41-C1A89C33C210@NLnetLabs.nl> Hi all, The draft agenda is just published, but we still have room for one contribution. You think some operational practices should be documented? Take the floor for a 10-15 minutes pitch and find other interested network engineers to work on a BCOP document! Drop me or Jan, or both, an email if you want to present your ideas. Best, Jan Zorz & Benno Overeinder -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ From sander at steffann.nl Wed May 25 16:56:55 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 16:56:55 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement Message-ID: Hi BCOP people, As I promised on Monday during the BCOP session at RIPE 72 I would prepare a community statement that reflect the wise words that our RIPE Chair, Hand Petter Holen, made at the opening ceremony. I discussed this with Hans Petter because I don't want to take someone else's words without permission. He was ok with using his words as the starting point and form a community statement in BCOP based on that. For reference here is the original transcript taken from https://ripe72.ripe.net/archives/steno/5/: > Now when that is said, it's always also important to realise that with IPv4 space, the legacy old IP addresses, there isn't anything left; we have a small reserve so new members can get a /22, as we call it, around a thousand addresses, so they can start up a business. But this is not things you can build your future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement v6 from the start, then you can get some v4 addresses so you can boot strap and still be connected to the legacy Internet, but it is possible today to build v6 networks and have transition mechanisms to v4 and that is the only sustainable way going forward. As my intention is both making a clear statement about the Best Current Operational Practice on using the last remaining IPv4 addresses, and to show confirmation as a community that we stand behind the statement from our RIPE chair I have stayed as close to this original as possible. I have reorganised it a bit to make it easier to read, and I propose that we bring the following text to the floor on Friday: ------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. ------------- If this task force agrees on a text I will present it on Friday during the closing plenary and ask the community as a whole to express their support. Please let me know if you think the proposed text is indeed a BCOP and that it represents the words from Hans Petter correctly. Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From jan at go6.si Wed May 25 17:42:50 2016 From: jan at go6.si (Jan Zorz) Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 17:42:50 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5745C7FA.5020609@go6.si> On 25/05/16 16:56, Sander Steffann wrote: > ------------- > It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 > space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a > /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate > with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build > their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to > implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks > today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only > sustainable way forward. > ------------- I like it. cheers, Jan From sb at lab.dtag.de Wed May 25 19:41:07 2016 From: sb at lab.dtag.de (Sebastian Becker) Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 19:41:07 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <5745C7FA.5020609@go6.si> References: <5745C7FA.5020609@go6.si> Message-ID: Me, too. -- Sebastian Becker sb at lab.dtag.de > Am 25.05.2016 um 17:42 schrieb Jan Zorz : > > > On 25/05/16 16:56, Sander Steffann wrote: >> ------------- >> It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 >> space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a >> /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate >> with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build >> their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to >> implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks >> today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only >> sustainable way forward. >> ------------- > > I like it. > > cheers, Jan > From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 26 15:59:05 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:59:05 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <5745C7FA.5020609@go6.si> Message-ID: Hi, > Me, too. Ok... A few statements of support, no objections. As I have to submit the slides on time for bringing this to the closing plenary tomorrow I ask the chairs to please judge on consensus :) Cheers! Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From jan at go6.si Thu May 26 16:08:00 2016 From: jan at go6.si (Jan Zorz) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 16:08:00 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <5745C7FA.5020609@go6.si> Message-ID: <57470340.1020605@go6.si> On 26/05/16 15:59, Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi, > >> Me, too. > > Ok... A few statements of support, no objections. As I have to submit > the slides on time for bringing this to the closing plenary tomorrow > I ask the chairs to please judge on consensus :)-- Well, I see no objections and my view is that text is good, so I would suggest you present it at the closing plenary. Let's also wait for Benno's input, I saw him running around and I'll mention him to express his opinion if I see him shortly. Cheers, Jan From wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk Thu May 26 16:09:40 2016 From: wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk (William Waites) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 14:09:40 +0000 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Sander Steffann writes: >> Now when that is said, it's always also important to realise that >> with IPv4 space, the legacy old IP addresses, there isn't anything >> left; we have a small reserve so new members can get a /22, as we >> call it, around a thousand addresses, so they can start up a >> business. But this is not things you can build your future on. The >> only way to survive in the future is to implement v6 from the start, >> then you can get some v4 addresses so you can boot strap and still be >> connected to the legacy Internet, but it is possible today to build >> v6 networks and have transition mechanisms to v4 and that is the only >> sustainable way going forward. It would be particularly valuable to have such a clear statement. For example, I have tried with limited success to get the Scottish government to require IPv6 deployment as a condition of providing grants to rural broadband projects. It is very difficult to get them to understand that this is very important for new networks, not just nice to have or something of interest to technical enthusiasts. I think a reasonably authoritative statement from the RIPE members would go some way towards convincing them. Best wishes, -w From modonovan at btireland.net Thu May 26 16:53:40 2016 From: modonovan at btireland.net (Mick O'Donovan) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:53:40 +0100 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: +1 from me. Text like this is very straight forward and simple for all to understand the pressing need. Like William says below here I'd support the text fully! Mick Mick O'Donovan | Network Engineer | BT Ireland | Website: http://www.btireland.net Looking Glass: http://lg.as2110.net Peering Record: http://as2110.peeringdb.com AS-SET Macro: AS-BTIRE | ASN: 2110 > On 26 May 2016, at 15:09, William Waites wrote: > > > Sander Steffann writes: > >>> Now when that is said, it's always also important to realise that >>> with IPv4 space, the legacy old IP addresses, there isn't anything >>> left; we have a small reserve so new members can get a /22, as we >>> call it, around a thousand addresses, so they can start up a >>> business. But this is not things you can build your future on. The >>> only way to survive in the future is to implement v6 from the start, >>> then you can get some v4 addresses so you can boot strap and still be >>> connected to the legacy Internet, but it is possible today to build >>> v6 networks and have transition mechanisms to v4 and that is the only >>> sustainable way going forward. > > It would be particularly valuable to have such a clear statement. For > example, I have tried with limited success to get the Scottish > government to require IPv6 deployment as a condition of providing grants > to rural broadband projects. It is very difficult to get them to > understand that this is very important for new networks, not just nice > to have or something of interest to technical enthusiasts. I think a > reasonably authoritative statement from the RIPE members would go some > way towards convincing them. > > Best wishes, > -w > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 26 17:11:05 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:11:05 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: Hello Mick and William, > +1 from me. > > Text like this is very straight forward and simple for all to understand the pressing need. Like William says below here I'd support the text fully! Thank you for your support. I just want to note that you quoted the literal transcript from Hans Petter in your messages, not the "polished" text that I am planning to present, which is: ------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. ------------- Please let me know if this is ok. Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk Thu May 26 17:28:05 2016 From: wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk (William Waites) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:28:05 +0000 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Sander Steffann writes: > > ------------- > It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the > RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can > start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy > Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future > on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from > the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have > transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way > forward. > ------------- > > Please let me know if this is ok. Yes, it is ok with me. I might suggest adding a sentence: ... can built their future on. It is not sustainable to build an IPv4-only network today. The only way to survive ... Mainly to introduce the word "sustainable" which is a keyword for the audience that I am thinking about. Best, -w From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 26 17:32:40 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:32:40 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: Hi, > Yes, it is ok with me. Thanks > I might suggest adding a sentence: > > ... can built their future on. It is not sustainable to build an > IPv4-only network today. The only way to survive ... > > Mainly to introduce the word "sustainable" which is a keyword for the > audience that I am thinking about. It already has the word "sustainable" a bit further down. In order not to complicate the consensus decision for the chairs I would prefer not to change the text now. Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From jan at go6.si Thu May 26 17:36:04 2016 From: jan at go6.si (Jan Zorz) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:36:04 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: <574717E4.7090801@go6.si> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 26/05/16 17:32, Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi, > >> Yes, it is ok with me. > > Thanks > >> I might suggest adding a sentence: >> >> ... can built their future on. It is not sustainable to build an >> IPv4-only network today. The only way to survive ... >> >> Mainly to introduce the word "sustainable" which is a keyword >> for the audience that I am thinking about. > > It already has the word "sustainable" a bit further down. In order > not to complicate the consensus decision for the chairs I would > prefer not to change the text now. Hey, Since I can't find Benno *and* there are voices of support *and* this stuff needs to be presented tomorrow morning I will dare to call a consensus. I think that the text in current form is a good message. Cheers and thnx, Jan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJXRxfkAAoJEGlfIPo1wzUzVjsH/19ge10HNbVXkZYWWDr3kr3j W58zHOyVa0khc5kv2aMxACHC2J2Q/nES5NoRjQuSiFX0ra5XXMQb/i7kE08kL0m4 +Y0iRZ+UNx6eNo/EXNDFRgpqnvh/pM/VUHnl7wV3dm3iTshJdU5iOlZ3gvT3PSS5 nqysONOw45LMnBHS/dZ6WhUrp2W9hB9LTT/PweJiYs0tmM1mXkCQWS2xyjkZLIAh MTOwGGBwHhqOZwdZdRFAx8VEKl2yhdflSMmxad+WLDdYJeWxKCf2xrmOM31WWK85 /sWda/irLFeroehAhoqmCbyN/vYxMiPp3XuCm/vOX4InttBlscm/2vlPboLKKM8= =AW3e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 26 17:37:03 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:37:03 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <574717E4.7090801@go6.si> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <574717E4.7090801@go6.si> Message-ID: <30384876-D690-4518-B386-77C9EFA8FBA9@steffann.nl> Hi Jan, > Since I can't find Benno *and* there are voices of support *and* this > stuff needs to be presented tomorrow morning I will dare to call a > consensus. > > I think that the text in current form is a good message. Great! In that case I will submit it for the closing plenary right now :) Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk Thu May 26 17:38:23 2016 From: wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk (William Waites) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:38:23 +0000 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: <86k2ign828.fsf@naartjie.uucp> > It already has the word "sustainable" a bit further down. In order not > to complicate the consensus decision for the chairs I would prefer not > to change the text now. Sorry, you are right. I'm doing too many things at the same time right now! I agree not to change the text. -w From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 26 17:59:02 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:59:02 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <86k2ign828.fsf@naartjie.uucp> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86k2ign828.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: Hi, > Sorry, you are right. I'm doing too many things at the same time right > now! I agree not to change the text. I know that feeling :) Thanks! Sander From mike.oghia at gmail.com Fri May 27 09:03:01 2016 From: mike.oghia at gmail.com (Michael Oghia) Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 10:03:01 +0300 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86k2ign828.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: Hi all, As soon as I saw Jan Zorz was replying to this thread, I couldn't help but jump in. My name is Michael Oghia. I am (currently) an Istanbul-based journalist and editor, but I am also very active within the Internet community, follow RIPE activities, and care about IXP and IPv6 proliferation. If the text or any future text ever need proofreading, please feel free to forward it along to me. I don't have a technical background, so I if there is any other way I can help out or contribute to the community, do let me know. Best, -Michael __________________ Michael J. Oghia Istanbul, Turkey Journalist & editor 2015 ISOC IGF Ambassador Skype: mikeoghia Twitter *|* LinkedIn On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 6:59 PM, Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi, > > > Sorry, you are right. I'm doing too many things at the same time right > > now! I agree not to change the text. > > I know that feeling :) > > Thanks! > Sander > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sander at steffann.nl Fri May 27 09:31:17 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 09:31:17 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86k2ign828.fsf@naartjie.uucp> Message-ID: <40912EB1-FBDC-4FA2-9A75-34917165444E@steffann.nl> Hello Michael, > As soon as I saw Jan Zorz was replying to this thread, I couldn't help but jump in. > > My name is Michael Oghia. I am (currently) an Istanbul-based journalist and editor, but I am also very active within the Internet community, follow RIPE activities, and care about IXP and IPv6 proliferation. If the text or any future text ever need proofreading, please feel free to forward it along to me. I don't have a technical background, so I if there is any other way I can help out or contribute to the community, do let me know. Thank you! Much appreciated. Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From benno at NLnetLabs.nl Mon May 30 15:00:38 2016 From: benno at NLnetLabs.nl (Benno Overeinder) Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:00:38 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <30384876-D690-4518-B386-77C9EFA8FBA9@steffann.nl> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <574717E4.7090801@go6.si> <30384876-D690-4518-B386-77C9EFA8FBA9@steffann.nl> Message-ID: <6b116c12-da15-9d27-7100-d4be04a6ea24@NLnetLabs.nl> Hi Sander and Jan, Thanks for coordinating this and making this statement at the closing plenary session. Cheers, -- Benno On 26/05/16 17:37, Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi Jan, > >> Since I can't find Benno *and* there are voices of support *and* this >> stuff needs to be presented tomorrow morning I will dare to call a >> consensus. >> >> I think that the text in current form is a good message. > > Great! In that case I will submit it for the closing plenary right now :) > > Cheers, > Sander > -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 841 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From sander at steffann.nl Mon May 30 15:48:57 2016 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:48:57 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <6b116c12-da15-9d27-7100-d4be04a6ea24@NLnetLabs.nl> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <574717E4.7090801@go6.si> <30384876-D690-4518-B386-77C9EFA8FBA9@steffann.nl> <6b116c12-da15-9d27-7100-d4be04a6ea24@NLnetLabs.nl> Message-ID: <9595EA0B-E33A-4EFC-9428-3854657A04F2@steffann.nl> Hi, > Thanks for coordinating this and making this statement at the closing > plenary session. Unfortunately the plenary didn't accept the statement as a community statement/resolution as-is. The good news is that the reason for that is that they wanted a stronger statement :) Ruediger Volk was the person stating that on the microphone during the plenary, and he offered to help improve the language. I talked to Hans Petter Holen about what to do next, and he suggested taking this to the ripe-list so we can get consensus there and still turn this into a community-wide supported statement, which I think is important. I suggest Ruediger and I work on the text and then take it straight to the ripe-list. Doing word-smithing first in BCOP and then on the ripe-list will probably double the work, and as the BCOP task force already had consensus on the old version I'd like to take this directly to the superset :-) Do you agree with this plan? Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From benno at NLnetLabs.nl Mon May 30 15:55:36 2016 From: benno at NLnetLabs.nl (Benno Overeinder) Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:55:36 +0200 Subject: [bcop] Community statement In-Reply-To: <9595EA0B-E33A-4EFC-9428-3854657A04F2@steffann.nl> References: <86oa7snc63.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <86lh2wn8je.fsf@naartjie.uucp> <574717E4.7090801@go6.si> <30384876-D690-4518-B386-77C9EFA8FBA9@steffann.nl> <6b116c12-da15-9d27-7100-d4be04a6ea24@NLnetLabs.nl> <9595EA0B-E33A-4EFC-9428-3854657A04F2@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Hi Sander, On 30/05/16 15:48, Sander Steffann wrote: >> Thanks for coordinating this and making this statement at the closing >> plenary session. > > Unfortunately the plenary didn't accept the statement as a community statement/resolution as-is. The good news is that the reason for that is that they wanted a stronger statement :) Ruediger Volk was the person stating that on the microphone during the plenary, and he offered to help improve the language. I talked to Hans Petter Holen about what to do next, and he suggested taking this to the ripe-list so we can get consensus there and still turn this into a community-wide supported statement, which I think is important. > > I suggest Ruediger and I work on the text and then take it straight to the ripe-list. Doing word-smithing first in BCOP and then on the ripe-list will probably double the work, and as the BCOP task force already had consensus on the old version I'd like to take this directly to the superset :-) > > Do you agree with this plan? I was happy to hear that the plenary supported the idea, but asked for a stronger wording of the statement. The procedure you suggested makes sense to me. Best, - Benno -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 841 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: