Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Randy Bush]

> I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept blame. 

if folk really feel the need to cast blame, blame me.  i don't give a
damn :)

> "it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or
> experienced in contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's
> contracts and agreements so they actually say what they were intended
> to mean."

i thing the NCC has a legal team.  the work would be in how structuring
legal documents interacts with community policy making.

randy

-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[denis walker]

Colleagues

Can we all take a deep breath and enjoy that cup of tea Nigel suggested.

I would like to thank people for their support, but also apologise if
I have caused a major incident. That was never my intention. I have
been a part of this community for a long time. Those of you who have
also been around for a while will know that I have an emotive style of
writing. I am naturally an emotional person. I have touched on this
issue before and no one really picked up on it. So I thought by
identifying the problems with one document it would show there is an
issue here to be sorted. Incidentally it didn't take me many hours, it
took me about 2 months. My concentration levels are not what they used
to be :)

My goal was to be positive in moving this matter forwards. The
problems I have identified can be easily fixed. These documents have
been written over a long period of time. Inconsistencies can build up.
It is now time for a review. Maybe that should be done by the legal
team who then report back to the mailing list or perhaps set up a Task
Force to work with the legal team to review the full set of policy and
procedure documents and make recommendations. At the end of the
exercise we will have a more solid foundation for this industry to
move forwards.

cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG

On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 at 15:37, Sander Steffann  wrote:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> > First of all thanks a lot to Denis for all his work, I imagine it must have 
> > taken hours.
> > We, the board and the NCC will follow up on it and will not just have a 
> > look at the content itself but also look into how did we end up in this 
> > situation in the first place.
> > We will come back to the mailing list after the legal evaluation is 
> > conducted and also report on this at the next RIPE Meeting.
>
> Thank you, this is what I would like to see.
>
> > Regarding the CoC aspect of this emails, we the board did not read Hans 
> > Petters comments as shutting down the conversation or policing anyone and 
> > we would not have allowed that.
>
> Well, then you the board should read it again... Invoking the Code of Conduct 
> when criticising the RIPE NCC is seen exactly as silencing. It also 
> diminishes the value of the Code of Conduct and sets a horrendous precedent. 
> This abuse of the CoC is EXACTLY what makes people afraid of adopting a CoC 
> in the first place. This abuse of the CoC bij a managing director and then 
> explicitly condoning that by the board damages all the hard work done by the 
> community.
>
> The board should be ashamed of itself regarding this part of its response.
> Sander
>

-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Sander Steffann]

Hi all,

I just had a phone call with Christian (because, you know, intonation and vocal 
emphasis can make a huge difference in understanding each other) and I want to 
report back here.

>> First of all thanks a lot to Denis for all his work, I imagine it must have 
>> taken hours.
>> We, the board and the NCC will follow up on it and will not just have a look 
>> at the content itself but also look into how did we end up in this situation 
>> in the first place.
>> We will come back to the mailing list after the legal evaluation is 
>> conducted and also report on this at the next RIPE Meeting.
> 
> Thank you, this is what I would like to see.

First of all, Christian acknowledged there were a lot of useful things in 
Denis' email that will be looked at by the NCC staff, so all the work Denis did 
will get used.

>> Regarding the CoC aspect of this emails, we the board did not read Hans 
>> Petters comments as shutting down the conversation or policing anyone and we 
>> would not have allowed that.
> 
> Well, then you the board should read it again... Invoking the Code of Conduct 
> when criticising the RIPE NCC is seen exactly as silencing. It also 
> diminishes the value of the Code of Conduct and sets a horrendous precedent. 
> This abuse of the CoC is EXACTLY what makes people afraid of adopting a CoC 
> in the first place. This abuse of the CoC bij a managing director and then 
> explicitly condoning that by the board damages all the hard work done by the 
> community.

But then the hard bit… As I understand it some of the NCC staff felt offended 
by some things Denis wrote, like "looks like it was written as an undergraduate 
project". The more people care about something, the more they are likely to be 
offended by criticism like this, and I *like* that the NCC staff cares! And I 
agree with them that Denis' tone was much too harsh for a community where we 
are all supposed to be working together. All of that apparently lead to Hans 
Petter to jump in and defend his staff, and that is part of his job. So I don't 
have any problems with any of this so far.

Where I strongly disagree is invoking the Code of Conduct in this case. There 
is a very difficult boundary between "don't write strong criticism on the RIPE 
NCC" vs "don't write strong criticism on the RIPE NCC in such a harsh tone". 
Cristian reminded me that many of us have know Hans Petter for many years, and 
though his use of the CoC reads like the former to some, we could give him the 
benefit of the doubt and read it as the latter. I still think invoking the CoC 
here was wrong, but I do indeed give Hans Petter the benefit of the doubt and 
will assume he indeed meant the latter. (HPH, would be nice if you could 
confirm my assumption here! ;)

I also understood from Christian that some people felt they couldn't speak up 
in defence of Hans Petter because of the strong replies sent to the list by me 
and other longtime members of this community. That leaves me in the awkward 
position of me myself not contributing to a welcoming and inclusive 
environment... So I'll invoke the Code of Conduct on myself :)

To summarise:
- I think Denis' wording was not very nice
- I think Hans Petter's use of the CoC was not good
- I know them both and am convinced they both want to do the best for this 
community (and the NCC staff which is also part of this community)
- My harsh response to Hans Petter was not good and I should have used milder 
language to keep the discussion open for positive contributions

I therefore want to defuse this thread and urge us to get back to the content 
of Denis' message and work with the NCC in a friendly way to make things better 
for all of us. And whenever invoking the CoC let us do it in that spirit.

Cheers,
Sander


-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Sander Steffann]

Hi Christian,

> First of all thanks a lot to Denis for all his work, I imagine it must have 
> taken hours.
> We, the board and the NCC will follow up on it and will not just have a look 
> at the content itself but also look into how did we end up in this situation 
> in the first place.
> We will come back to the mailing list after the legal evaluation is conducted 
> and also report on this at the next RIPE Meeting.

Thank you, this is what I would like to see.

> Regarding the CoC aspect of this emails, we the board did not read Hans 
> Petters comments as shutting down the conversation or policing anyone and we 
> would not have allowed that.

Well, then you the board should read it again... Invoking the Code of Conduct 
when criticising the RIPE NCC is seen exactly as silencing. It also diminishes 
the value of the Code of Conduct and sets a horrendous precedent. This abuse of 
the CoC is EXACTLY what makes people afraid of adopting a CoC in the first 
place. This abuse of the CoC bij a managing director and then explicitly 
condoning that by the board damages all the hard work done by the community.

The board should be ashamed of itself regarding this part of its response.
Sander


-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Christian Kaufmann]

Dear Denis,
Dear Fellow Members,
Dear all,

First of all thanks a lot to Denis for all his work, I imagine it must have 
taken hours.
We, the board and the NCC will follow up on it and will not just have a look at 
the content itself but also look into how did we end up in this situation in 
the first place.
We will come back to the mailing list after the legal evaluation is conducted 
and also report on this at the next RIPE Meeting.

Regarding the CoC aspect of this emails, we the board did not read Hans Petters 
comments as shutting down the conversation or policing anyone and we would not 
have allowed that.

Best regards and please keep a respectful discussion in this challenging times.

Christian Kaufmann
Chairman of the NCC Executive Board

> On 31. Jan 2022, at 20:58, Hans Petter Holen  wrote:
>
> Dennis,
>
> Since you are a working group chair I am making this response in public.
>
> Thank you very much for your feedback on the LIR and Member Agreements.
>
> I do welcome constructive feedback and suggestions for improvements.
>
> I will not comment on your email right now, now but I will, however, point 
> you to the RIPE Code of Conduct.
>
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-766
>
> I read your characterisations of the document, as
> "This is probably one of the worst»
>
> as well as numerous others characterisations I will refrain from quoting, 
> though out the document as completely unnecessary.
>
> They are not helping everyone to feel safe and included.
>
> Your choice of language does in my opinion, not adhere to the following 
> principles from the Code of Conduct:
>
> • Being considerate and showing empathy towards others, especially when 
> disagreeing or raising issues
> • Giving/receiving feedback or suggestions in a positive way.
> • Using welcoming and inclusive language
>
> I would like to encourage a healthy discussion for improving the document, 
> but you make it very difficult for me to do so, and I sincerely hope the tone 
> of the discussion can be constructive.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Hans Petter Holen
> Managing Director
> RIPE NCC
>
> -- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Nigel Titley]

Dear Athina

On 01/02/2022 13:26, Athina Fragkouli wrote:

We appreciate this input on our legal documents. I would like to assure you 
that the points raised will be evaluated by legal experts.

This type of feedback is always appreciated and we will give it our full 
attention. However, I would caution against confusing opinion with legal 
expertise.


I think this is the response we were all hoping for.

Many thanks

Nigel

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Athina Fragkouli]

Dear all,

We appreciate this input on our legal documents. I would like to assure you 
that the points raised will be evaluated by legal experts. 

This type of feedback is always appreciated and we will give it our full 
attention. However, I would caution against confusing opinion with legal 
expertise.

Regards,

Athina Fragkouli
Chief Legal Officer
RIPE NCC



> On 31 Jan 2022, at 16:20, denis walker  wrote:
> 
> Colleagues
> 
> [I make no apologies for the length of this email. There are so many
> errors to discuss. For an overview you can stop reading at the line of
> ''. Below that is the detailed review of all the errors.]
> 
> I have been reading lots of policies, procedures and
> agreements/contracts over the last couple of months to catch up with
> current and historical developments of address policy and it's
> application to allocating resources. It has been an eye opener. Right
> now I want to focus mainly on the 'RIPE NCC LIR Account Agreement'.
> Most of the documents I have read are poorly written. This is probably
> one of the worst. I will itemise below the details of what is wrong
> with this document. But firstly I will point out some of the serious
> mistakes.
> 
> In this agreement there is a definition in Article 1...
> 
> -RIPE NCC services
> The Membership Services provided through an LIR account as specified
> in the current version of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan.
> 
> In the 'RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement" there is also this
> definition in Article 1...
> 
> -RIPE NCC services
> The Membership Services as specified in the current version of the
> RIPE NCC Activity Plan.
> 
> There are no Membership Services specified in the current version of
> the RIPE NCC Activity Plan. There hasn't been such a specification
> since the activity plan of 2017. So for the last 5 years all the
> active SSAs and LIR Agreements have been referring to an 'empty list'.
> As both these agreements revolve heavily around these services, I have
> no idea what the legal significance is of agreements based on an empty
> list of services.
> 
> Another serious issue is the absolute, total lack of any legal
> definition of an LIR (Local Internet Registry) and LIR account and the
> relationship between LIR and Member. I have not been able to find any
> such definitions anywhere on the ripe.net website. I fear they may be
> mentioned in some early RIPE document written 20 years ago that no one
> could reasonably be expected to find in relation to these agreements.
> 
> Then we have in Article 3 of the SSA:
> "the Member acknowledges and accepts that it has obtained the right to
> use the RIPE NCC services under the conditions outlined in this
> agreement."
> 
> And in Article 3 of the LIR Agreement:
> "the Member acknowledges and accepts that it has obtained the right to
> use the RIPE NCC services through this LIR account under the
> conditions outlined in this Agreement."
> 
> So under what conditions can a Member use these (undefined) services?
> -those in the SSA
> -those in the LIR Agreement
> -a superset of the two sets
> -the intersection of the two sets
> 
> **
> I want to put forward a suggestion that the RIPE NCC engages the
> services of, or employs, a professional contract lawyer to review and
> if necessary re-write all of the agreements/contracts used by the RIPE
> NCC. Or at least someone with legal training and experience in the
> area of contract writing.
> **
> 
> It was said in a zoom meeting last Wednesday (about reviewing the PDP)
> that we should keep to a minimum the legal terminology and rely on
> common sense. That was a valid mindset in the 1990s when the internet
> was mostly an 'old boys/girls club'. In 2022 this is a very different
> global, critical industry. The IPv4 market has also changed this
> industry. There is so much money invested in IPv4 addresses that one
> 'wrong' decision by the RIPE community could face a legal challenge.
> If the RIPE NCC has to go to court to defend such an action they would
> have a better defence based on rock solid, well written, legally
> watertight contracts than based on a set of poorly written,
> contradictory documents, common sense and a generally accepted view of
> how things work(ed).
> 
> Almost every document I have read has mistakes in it. Some have lots
> more than others. I wondered why people sign contracts with so many
> mistakes. Then I realised that most of the Members are not native
> English speakers, and neither are their lawyers. They almost certainly
> pass these documents through some translation app. Probably they
> accept some of the errors as translation errors. So if they go to
> court over these contracts it will be a case of an LIR arguing over
> what they think they signed, vs the RIPE NCC defending what they think
> they wrote. Neither will be a true reflection of reality.
> 
> I know some people will criticise me for pointing out 'trivial'
> grammar errors in this document. (Some people wi

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Nigel Titley]

On 01/02/2022 12:40, Jim Reid wrote:




On 31 Jan 2022, at 21:15, Gert Doering  wrote:

I find the use of the Code of Conduct as a tool to suppress criticism
*on documents* very much inappropriate.

This is not making *me* feel "safe and included".


+gazillions

Hans Petter’s comments were ill judged and grossly inappropriate.


Tea, Jim, tea...

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Jim Reid]

> On 31 Jan 2022, at 21:15, Gert Doering  wrote:
> 
> I find the use of the Code of Conduct as a tool to suppress criticism
> *on documents* very much inappropriate.
> 
> This is not making *me* feel "safe and included".

+gazillions

Hans Petter’s comments were ill judged and grossly inappropriate.


-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Nigel Titley]

On 01/02/2022 10:49, Gert Doering wrote:

Hi Nigel,

On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 10:31:15AM +, Nigel Titley wrote:

I call on everyone, myself included, to calm down, have a cup of tea,
and let Hans-Petter get on with the job of getting his legal team to
verify (or not) what Denis has said.


This sounds like excellent advice :-)

Getting a nice cup of black tea with ginger now...


I'm not generally a fan of black tea, but I *do* like ginger. That 
sounds like an interesting combination.


All the best

Nigel

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Gert Doering]

Hi Nigel,

On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 10:31:15AM +, Nigel Titley wrote:
> I call on everyone, myself included, to calm down, have a cup of tea, 
> and let Hans-Petter get on with the job of getting his legal team to 
> verify (or not) what Denis has said.

This sounds like excellent advice :-)

Getting a nice cup of black tea with ginger now...

Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG  Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Nigel Titley]

Hank

On 01/02/2022 06:56, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept blame. 
Denis is not accusing anyone.  If anything, we are all to blame for not 
being as diligent as Denis.    Denis has even suggested a way forward:


"it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or experienced 
in contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's contracts and 
agreements so they actually say what they were intended to mean."


Indeed, and I think that this would be the way forward. And I also thank 
Denis for the excellent analysis that he has done. If this had occurred 
on my watch then I would have started by pointing the RIPE NCC legal 
team at Denis' remarks and asking them to do their own analysis. I would 
also have thanked Denis publicly, whilst noting that his language might 
have been more temperate.


The trouble with the Respect Policy is that it is rather like a machine 
gun. There are times when it is the weapon of choice: in a case of 
bullying or ad hominem attack for instance. But where the attack has 
been against a document, whose authors are lost in the mists of time, it 
is like using a machine gun against a pea-shooter. And for it to be 
brought out at the start of a discussion makes one start to very gently 
wonder if there is maybe more of a case to answer than can be explained 
by bit-rot, documents not written by native English speakers and 
internet chat-room lawyers (amongst whom I proudly count myself 
(although I would claim that my English is probably fair enough)).


Finally, I would just like this to be laid to rest. Tempers are rising 
and the heat may eventually reach the level where the Respect Policy 
*is* the weapon of choice.


I call on everyone, myself included, to calm down, have a cup of tea, 
and let Hans-Petter get on with the job of getting his legal team to 
verify (or not) what Denis has said.


Yours in Peace ;-)

Nigel


--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Elvis Daniel Velea]

I can’t believe I agree with Jordi in this one (and I hope I am not
violating the CoC by saying this)

But… HPH with a whole RIPE NCC communications team couldn’t miss interpret
the CoC, right? They even went as far as to quote the articles the e-mail
violates…

So, if the CoC’s interpretation of Denis’ e-mail says he is violating a few
articles, then we definitely have the wrong CoC or the wrong interpretation.

What I don’t understand is the first sentence in HPH’s e-mail. Had Denis
been a regular community member (no wg chair hats), would the message have
been different or just private?

Elvis

On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 02:03 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list <
ripe-list@ripe.net> wrote:

> Totally agree with what others have said: I don't think Denis email had
> anything wrong.
>
> Each person has a different way to say things. Language and expressions
> may look a bit in the limit sometimes, especially when the reader is not
> native speaker (or even worst, when you aren't English native speaker and
> you write in English), but I can't find anything wrong in that specific
> message.
>
> This brings us to another big problem:
>
> * if the CoC can be interpreted in such way, we have the wrong CoC * and
> that's really dangerous, because it means that the one who judges the CoC
> can become a dictator.
>
> (just to make sure I'm on the safe side and not being accused myself about
> breking the CoC: I'm not accusing anyone here, just expressing what a wrong
> CoC can mean)
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
>
>
>
> El 1/2/22 10:32, "ripe-list en nombre de Carlos Friaças via ripe-list" <
> ripe-list-boun...@ripe.net en nombre de ripe-list@ripe.net> escribió:
>
>
> +1.
>
> I honestly didn't read Denis' lenghty e-mail until i read HPH's
> message,
> and thought "oh i really need to go back and read that" :-)
>
> Regards,
> Carlos
>
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2022, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>
> > I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept
> blame.  Denis
> > is not accusing anyone.  If anything, we are all to blame for not
> being as
> > diligent as Denis.Denis has even suggested a way forward:
> >
> > "it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or
> experienced in
> > contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's contracts and
> agreements so
> > they actually say what they were intended to mean."
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Hank--
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or
> change your subscription options, please visit:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
>
>
>
> **
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized
> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal
> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
> communication and delete it.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change
> your subscription options, please visit:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
>
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list]

Totally agree with what others have said: I don't think Denis email had 
anything wrong.

Each person has a different way to say things. Language and expressions may 
look a bit in the limit sometimes, especially when the reader is not native 
speaker (or even worst, when you aren't English native speaker and you write in 
English), but I can't find anything wrong in that specific message.

This brings us to another big problem:

* if the CoC can be interpreted in such way, we have the wrong CoC * and that's 
really dangerous, because it means that the one who judges the CoC can become a 
dictator.

(just to make sure I'm on the safe side and not being accused myself about 
breking the CoC: I'm not accusing anyone here, just expressing what a wrong CoC 
can mean)
 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 1/2/22 10:32, "ripe-list en nombre de Carlos Friaças via ripe-list" 
 escribió:


+1.

I honestly didn't read Denis' lenghty e-mail until i read HPH's message, 
and thought "oh i really need to go back and read that" :-)

Regards,
Carlos



On Tue, 1 Feb 2022, Hank Nussbacher wrote:

> I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept blame.  
Denis 
> is not accusing anyone.  If anything, we are all to blame for not being 
as 
> diligent as Denis.Denis has even suggested a way forward:
>
> "it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or experienced 
in 
> contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's contracts and 
agreements so 
> they actually say what they were intended to mean."
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Hank-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change 
your subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list



**
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or 
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the 
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, 
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if 
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be 
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the 
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.




-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Carlos Friaças via ripe-list]

+1.

I honestly didn't read Denis' lenghty e-mail until i read HPH's message, 
and thought "oh i really need to go back and read that" :-)


Regards,
Carlos



On Tue, 1 Feb 2022, Hank Nussbacher wrote:

I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept blame.  Denis 
is not accusing anyone.  If anything, we are all to blame for not being as 
diligent as Denis.    Denis has even suggested a way forward:


"it will benefit the RIPE NCC to employ someone qualified or experienced in 
contract law to review and re-write all the NCC's contracts and agreements so 
they actually say what they were intended to mean."



Regards,

Hank-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Alex de Joode]

​Great, a new month and two issues:

 * the state of the RIPE NCC' legal stack
 * a 'tone police' issue
Many of Dennis' points are valid.  Yes documents are written by ppl. PPL make 
mistakes. You should be able to call out mistakes. Using the Code of Conduct in 
this way, for me, feels totally inappropriate. Dennis' email was a balanced 
fact giving exercise, not a rant attacking individual persons. Using the CoC in 
this way certainly does not help solve issue #1, and might  even have a 
negative effect by people not willing to speak out on issues (issues always 
involve people and speaking out sometimes hurt feelings etc.)  due to CoC 
concerns. 

This is not the way.​-- 
IDGARA | Alex de Joode | a...@idgara.nl | +31651108221 


On Tue, 01-02-2022 10h 00min, "Barry O'Donovan (Open Solutions)" 
 wrote:
> 


Hi all,
> 

> 
I have to say, I find some of the reactions to Hans' email perplexing. 
It's almost as if one has never written anything that has been 
criticised is public. Of course 'the documents' don't have feelings. But
 the authors do, and I expect these authors are amongst our community 
and on the executive. 
> 

> 
Coming at this with such bullish language as the following is not the 
way to start a discussion on this:
> 

> 
> 
  
Most of the documents I have read are poorly written. This is probably
one of the worst. I will itemise below the details of what is wrong
with this document. But firstly I will point out some of the serious
mistakes.




I, like Hans (which has somehow been interpreting as an attempt to 
'suppress criticism'?), would suggest Denis come at this again with a 
more conciliatory stance.



Let me restate for the absolute avoidance of doubt: zero suppression; 
please restate and try again.



 - Barry





Gert Doering wrote on 31/01/2022 21:15:

> 
  
Hi,

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 08:58:22PM +0100, Hans Petter Holen wrote:


  > 
I will not comment on your email right now, now but I will, however, point you 
to the RIPE Code of Conduct.

https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-766 


I read your characterisations of the document, as
"This is probably one of the worst»

as well as numerous others characterisations I will refrain from quoting,  
though out the document as completely unnecessary.

They are not helping everyone to feel safe and included.

I find the use of the Code of Conduct as a tool to suppress criticism
*on documents* very much inappropriate.

This is not making *me* feel "safe and included".

Denis has explained well enough why he thinks that many of these documents 
are not in a good shape, singling out the one he thinks is the worst of 
these as a starting point to get the work started to improve them.

Gert Doering
-- LIR representative


  

  
  



-- 


Kind regards,


Barry O'Donovan





Open Solutions - Internet Infrastructure Specialists





Web: http://www.opensolutions.ie/


Mob: +353 86 801 7669





Open Source Solutions Limited


52 Sandwith Street Lower


Dublin, D02 WR26, 
Ireland







-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Barry O'Donovan (Open Solutions)]

Hi all,

I have to say, I find some of the reactions to Hans' email perplexing. 
It's almost as if one has never written anything that has been 
criticised is public. Of course 'the documents' don't have feelings. But 
the authors do, and I expect these authors are amongst our community and 
on the executive.


Coming at this with such bullish language as the following is not the 
way to start a discussion on this:



Most of the documents I have read are poorly written. This is probably
one of the worst. I will itemise below the details of what is wrong
with this document. But firstly I will point out some of the serious
mistakes.


I, like Hans (which has somehow been interpreting as an attempt to 
'suppress criticism'?), would suggest Denis come at this again with a 
more conciliatory stance.


Let me restate for the absolute avoidance of doubt: zero suppression; 
please restate and try again.


 - Barry


Gert Doering wrote on 31/01/2022 21:15:

Hi,

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 08:58:22PM +0100, Hans Petter Holen wrote:

I will not comment on your email right now, now but I will, however, point you 
to the RIPE Code of Conduct.

https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-766 


I read your characterisations of the document, as
"This is probably one of the worst»

as well as numerous others characterisations I will refrain from quoting,  
though out the document as completely unnecessary.

They are not helping everyone to feel safe and included.

I find the use of the Code of Conduct as a tool to suppress criticism
*on documents* very much inappropriate.

This is not making *me* feel "safe and included".

Denis has explained well enough why he thinks that many of these documents
are not in a good shape, singling out the one he thinks is the worst of
these as a starting point to get the work started to improve them.

Gert Doering
 -- LIR representative




--

Kind regards,
Barry O'Donovan

Open Solutions - Internet Infrastructure Specialists

Web: http://www.opensolutions.ie/
Mob: +353 86 801 7669

Open Source Solutions Limited
52 Sandwith Street Lower
Dublin, D02 WR26, Ireland

-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list

[ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

[Alex de Joode]

​Hi Dennis,

Thanks for the lengthy mail, you touch upon many valid points, however one 
point is not valid:


Article 2.3
"The RIPE NCC reserves the right to amend this Agreement. The RIPE NCC
shall notify the Member of such amendments at least one month before
these amendments come into effect."
This clause is almost certainly unenforceable. It is also ridiculous.
It says the RIPE NCC can make any change it wants to this agreement at
any time (after you have signed it) without any consultation with any
individual, group or community and without any consensus, approval or
acceptance and put the change into effect and expect all LIRs to
comply with the change. If the NCC wants to fix the simple grammar
errors, they would probably get away with it. Any substantive change
would almost certainly be met with a legal challenge. They cannot
impose a substantive change on 20k+ signatories.

Actually, they can. Under Dutch law you have the option to update the T&C,
inform your customers about the change and give them some time (3 months is
standard) to either accept or move out. Customers can accept the updated T&C, 
by either doing nothing or by accepting them explicitly, so the new T&S will be 
come active on the communicated date. Or they can reject the changes, this 
means 
normally the agreement ends. This is a real shocker to many foreign companies 
(I 
know from experience),  but it is possible and common practise in NL based 
contracts.
​-- 
IDGARA | Alex de Joode | a...@idgara.nl | +31651108221 


On Mon, 31-01-2022 16h 20min, denis walker  wrote:
> 
Colleagues
> 
> [I make no apologies for the length of this email. There are so many
> errors to discuss. For an overview you can stop reading at the line of
> ''. Below that is the detailed review of all the errors.]
> 
> I have been reading lots of policies, procedures and
> agreements/contracts over the last couple of months to catch up with
> current and historical developments of address policy and it's
> application to allocating resources. It has been an eye opener. Right
> now I want to focus mainly on the 'RIPE NCC LIR Account Agreement'.
> Most of the documents I have read are poorly written. This is probably
> one of the worst. I will itemise below the details of what is wrong
> with this document. But firstly I will point out some of the serious
> mistakes.
> 
> In this agreement there is a definition in Article 1...
> 
> -RIPE NCC services
> The Membership Services provided through an LIR account as specified
> in the current version of the RIPE NCC Activity Plan.
> 
> In the 'RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement" there is also this
> definition in Article 1...
> 
> -RIPE NCC services
> The Membership Services as specified in the current version of the
> RIPE NCC Activity Plan.
> 
> There are no Membership Services specified in the current version of
> the RIPE NCC Activity Plan. There hasn't been such a specification
> since the activity plan of 2017. So for the last 5 years all the
> active SSAs and LIR Agreements have been referring to an 'empty list'.
> As both these agreements revolve heavily around these services, I have
> no idea what the legal significance is of agreements based on an empty
> list of services.
> 
> Another serious issue is the absolute, total lack of any legal
> definition of an LIR (Local Internet Registry) and LIR account and the
> relationship between LIR and Member. I have not been able to find any
> such definitions anywhere on the ripe.net website. I fear they may be
> mentioned in some early RIPE document written 20 years ago that no one
> could reasonably be expected to find in relation to these agreements.
> 
> Then we have in Article 3 of the SSA:
> "the Member acknowledges and accepts that it has obtained the right to
> use the RIPE NCC services under the conditions outlined in this
> agreement."
> 
> And in Article 3 of the LIR Agreement:
> "the Member acknowledges and accepts that it has obtained the right to
> use the RIPE NCC services through this LIR account under the
> conditions outlined in this Agreement."
> 
> So under what conditions can a Member use these (undefined) services?
> -those in the SSA
> -those in the LIR Agreement
> -a superset of the two sets
> -the intersection of the two sets
> 
> **
> I want to put forward a suggestion that the RIPE NCC engages the
> services of, or employs, a professional contract lawyer to review and
> if necessary re-write all of the agreements/contracts used by the RIPE
> NCC. Or at least someone with legal training and experience in the
> area of contract writing.
> **
> 
> It was said in a zoom meeting last Wednesday (about reviewing the PDP)
> that we should keep to a minimum the legal terminology and rely on
> common sense. That was a valid mindset in the 1990s when the internet
> was mostly an 'old boys/girls club'. In 2022 this is a very different
> global, critical industry. The IPv4 market has also changed this
> industry. There is so m