On 4 Jul 2021, at 7:29, Saku Ytti wrote:
On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 at 08:11, Daniel Karrenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
My intention was not to sneer, …
I am happy you did not *intend* to sneer. Maybe it even did not sound
like that to everyone. ;-)
You certainly hit one of *my* sensitivities because to me you sounded
like countless others who take cheap shots at the ‘de-facto
monopoly’ and its ‘mission creep’ while they ignore the bottom-up
way the RIPE NCC is organised. Typically their only suggestion on how to
improve is to call for ’competition’. Well, ‘competition’ and
‘monopoly’ are not really compatible by definition.
With your explanation this ‘sneer’ turns into the strangest way ever
of saying that a comfortably funded ‘de-facto monopoly’ with
sensible amounts of ‘mission creep’ is more resilient and stable
than a company that is focussed on shareholder value in the next quarter
or a bare bones registry operation. And I agree with you; which will not
really surprise anyone.
It is essential to keep both the registry service and the ‘mission
creep’ acceptable to both the community and the paying membership.
Such acceptance comes from a combination of trust and control. That was
the essence of what I was trying to say.
Now let’s stop this intermission and get back to the matter at hand,
’RIPE NCC and the Cloud - Let’s Start Again’. We have noticed some
damage to community trust and we are working hard to repair that.
Gaining trust is always harder than loosing it. Stay tuned for another
summary of the concerns and requirements that we heard so far and
suggestions on how to move forward. Everyone, please let us know if we
missed something important. It does not hurt to say something positive
about how we all deal with this either. ;-) ;-) :-)
Daniel
