Hi Marco, I just want to comment on one statement:
> the e164.arpa zone was not empty. And I know of at least one delegation that > still functions both administratively and technically (that operator > identified itself on the mailing list). It's useless. When a single operator uses the entire technology stack without interoperability, the technology should not be considered for wider use. Please stand for the shutdown. -- Best regards, Sergey Myasoedov, not an ITU participant, just a RIPE/RIPE NCC member > On 8/24/2026, at 18:19, Marco Hogewoning <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Jim, Hisham, > > Agree and support the point this should be a Contribution proper and not an > (unrequested LS). I recall RIPE NCC is a full sector member of ITU-T, so > there should not be any obstacle to submit a contribution – apart from a now > tight deadline – and, as a member, RIPE NCC staff should also be part of the > subsequent discussion and decision. > > Especially given the current situation is largely attributed to > miscommunication and misunderstandings, I think it is essential for RIPE NCC > staff to be present and participate, up to and including the closing plenary. > > As for the content - I think indeed a "this didn't happen" should be > considered a reasonable outcome for all parties concerned. > > Last I looked, the e164.arpa zone was not empty. And I know of at least one > delegation that still functions both administratively and technically (that > operator identified itself on the mailing list). > > Any responsible DNS operator would not close a zone with active delegations, > at least not without a proper risk assessment and a plan. As Jim suggested, > better not drag this on and move along quickly – nothing to see, nothing > happened. > > My two cents as a long time participant in ITU and with an even longer track > record in Internet Governance. > > Best, > > MarcoH > -- > Sent from one of those tiny devices and on a personal title > >> On 24 Aug 2026, at 15:36, Jim Reid <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 17 Aug 2026, at 15:48, Hisham Ibrahim <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I would appreciate feedback on my draft and I would appreciate it if you >>> could share any comments or concerns, particularly on the technical, >>> procedural or governance aspects, by 25 August, so that the RIPE NCC can >>> incorporate the feedback before finalizing the submission. >> >> Hisham, your proposed document is deeply flawed and unfit for purpose. That >> means I object to your proposal and obviously do not support it. I could go >> into this in detail but there's not enough time to do that. A submission to >> the next Study Group 2 meeting has to be submitted by tomorrow. BTW, that >> submission must be submitted as a Contribution. It can't be a Liaison >> Statement. Contact me off-list if you want an explanation. >> >> The Contribution that gets submitted by the NCC must be short and leave no >> loose ends that would open opportunities for nit-picking, requests for >> clarification, further unwelcome interference by the ITU and so on. Your >> suggested text won't do that. The objective must be to kill off C196 and >> leave no opportunities at ITU for exhuming it. C196 needs two shots to the >> head, just to be sure. If C196 drags on and on and on, it will be bad for >> everyone. >> >> Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets >> community support. >> >> The RIPE NCC regrets to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that Contribution >> SG2-C-0196 (C196), was ill-prepared and based on misunderstandings. It does >> not reflect the opinion of the NCC or the RIPE Community. The RIPE NCC >> sincerely apologises for the confusion which has been caused. C196 should >> therefore be withdrawn. We respectfully request colleagues pay no further >> attention to C196 and proceed on the basis it had never been submitted to >> Study Group 2. >> >> We are happy to confirm there are no technical or procedural changes to the >> operation of the e164.arpa ENUM registry. RIPE NCC is pleased to inform >> Study Group 2 and the TSB that the current, long-standing agreements around >> this registry remain in place and are unchanged. It has no plans to alter >> them. The RIPE NCC will continue to operate this registry in the same >> neutral, stable and professional manner as it has done since e164.arpa was >> created. >> ----- >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, >> please visit: >> https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/ncc-services-wg.ripe.net/ >> As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with >> the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. >> More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ > ----- > To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, > please visit: > https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/ncc-services-wg.ripe.net/ > As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the > email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. > More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ ----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/ncc-services-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
