Archives

RIPE 81
RIPE Community Plenary
.
30 October 2020
.
10 a.m. CET
.
MIRJAM KUHNE: Good morning, everybody. It's ten o'clock on Friday morning and it almost feels like in a real RIPE meeting after the party on Thursday. We had a great party last night, I hope you all enjoyed it. We'll wait a few more minutes for people to come in to join, and then we'll start.
.
We have a full agenda so we'll start. I'll share my screen and then off we go.
.
If something goes wrong, you'll have to shout at me, because I can't see the Meetecho platform. Can you see the slides now?
.
Right, so let's get started. This is the Friday after a RIPE meeting week of RIPE 81, the Community Plenary, and as people mentioned to me during the week, maybe it wasn't clear on Monday when ‑‑ or Tuesday when we started, and also some people might have missed the Opening Plenary, that you actually had a change in leadership. I want to take a step back quickly and introduce myself again and give you a bit of a history.
.
So, many of you might know this, but we also would like of course explain this to the new people at the RIPE meeting. This is the list of RIPE Chairs you had so far. So, Rob Blokzijl, he started as the Chair of RIPE 1 and he was the Chair of the RIPE community for 25 years until RIPE 68. Then he handed over the role of the chairs to Hans Petter Holen. Unfortunately, Rob passed away a few years after that, so Hans Petter has continued the role of RIPE Chair for about five years until RIPE 80. And one task that Rob kind of gave to Hans Petter at the time was to basically set up a process to select the next Chair because there was no process. Rob just started this and everybody was happy with him doing this role, filling this role for 25 years, and when Hans Petter started, he started to develop a process for RIPE Chair selection that went to the community and was put in place last year when the committee started, and the result of that whole process was the selection of a new Chair, which is me.
.
So I have started as a RIPE Chair in September. The official handover ‑‑ we would have liked to do this at this RIPE meeting and in person, but c'est la vie, so ‑‑ but since Hans Petter also started his new job as the Managing Director at the RIPE NCC earlier this year, we started a bit earlier than at this RIPE meeting, so I started in September, and, together with me, we have a vice‑chair, Niall O'Reilly, who is also here with us, he is there in the background, hopefully answering your questions and keeping an eye ‑‑ and also keeping an eye on the time.
.
So, with that, I have been the Chair now during this meeting. So this is the beginning of the Community Plenary, which we started to introduce again a few years ago to basically cover topics that are relevant for the entire RIPE community, kind of more high‑level topics and so here is the agenda.

Niall and I will give you a quick update on what we have been doing so far as and also what our plans are for the next period, and we'd like to also get some feedback from you. Then we'll have a number of reports from the two task forces, the Database Task Force, and the Code of Conduct Task Force. I'll quickly give you an update of the RIPE Working Group Chairs' collective document that I have sent to the RIPE list a few weeks ago, and then in the next slot after the coffee break, we'll have some more reports, one from the Address Supporting Organisation and one from the RIPE Nominating Committee Chair. If we have time, hopefully we'll ‑‑ we can have a discussion. But I think we might have some some time after now, after our update.
.
So, as I said, we just started in September so there wasn't a lot of time but it feels already like a long time for us, we have been rather busy. So, we took over, obviously, some tasks from Hans Petter, who already initiated some activities that we took on, and then the next priority for us was obviously prepare for the RIPE meeting, and also to put together this Community Plenary as one of the tasks.

And some people have asked us also how Niall and I are kind of distributing the tasks and working together as Chair and Vice‑Chair because this is the first time ‑‑ not the very first time, but since a long time that we have a vice‑chair again, and so it feels like we are working as a team. We have frequent calls, keep each other in the loop. We'll see later on if there are some tasks that we can split up, like, for instance, attending different types of meetings, but, so far, we have discussed everything basically together and also decisions that we make we'll do together, as a team.
.
One thing we wanted to do from the start is to basically reach out to all the Working Group Chair teams and we have talked to almost all of them before the RIPE meeting, and not as a group, not as a collective, but really Working Group by Working Group, and it was really good, we got a lot of good input and they are all different, obviously, different topics, different experiences, different age of the group, different interactions, and the one reason was also to find out if there is anything we can do to support the Working Group Chairs more, because they obviously are all volunteers.
.
It was also interesting to hear some recurring topics, and that was mostly the challenge to find new RIPE Working Group Chairs, and that also came up on some of the mailing lists before the meeting, and we had some good discussions and we have some ideas on maybe how to, you know, bring more ‑‑ newer attendees to become more active and encourage them to take on roles in the future. That's one thing that we'll have to do. I'll come back to that.
.
And then one other task, one other activity that we were quite busy with, was, first of all, the setup of the new Code of Conduct Task Force to continue the work that the diversity group has started over the last few years. That was already initiated by Hans Petter Holen before, and there will be a report on that later on so I won't go into a lot more detail here.
.
And then we also interacted with the RIPE Database Requirements Task Force, who have been in ‑‑ that's been in place for a while and there will also be some more information later on. They had a BoF on Monday.
.
And then, as I said, primarily it was preparing for the RIPE meeting and also next, the next phase, I think, will be primarily following up from the RIPE meeting. For instance, I got a lot of feedback, input from people during the week. I took some notes, a lot of notes, we'll share with ‑‑ Niall and I will share our experiences and notes and follow up from that.
.
Another thing that's high on our priority list is what we called RIPE Identity. For instance, we would like to review the RIPE section on the ripe.net website and see if we can make it more visible, attractive for new participants. We also would like to review the RIPE documents store, see if there is something we can improve maybe in terms of the metadata. I already heard earlier this peak Petrit has suggested a new field in some of the policy documents and so we'll see if we can make that more consistent and make the RIPE document store a proper archive of our activities and our work as a community.
.
We will definitely engage more with the RIPE Working Group Chairs and the task forces, to see how we can support them. And one other topic that came up in our preparation during the nominations process, doing the whole selection process is the relationship between RIPE and the RIPE NCC. That's something we have to look at too, something we have to define more, we would like to discuss this with the community some more.
.
And then last but not least, there is still recommendations from the Accountability Task Force that finished their work a couple of years ago, I think, but there is a long list of recommendations that's on the website, and Hans Petter Holen had already started to address some of these recommendations and we will continue to do that.
.
And then one other thing I would like to call inclusion, maybe, and is really what I mentioned earlier, how to attract new participation and also engage them more actively. I think Hans Petter mentioned earlier in the week, it's not just a diverse community but it's also important to, you know, have inclusion and belonging of people so that they really feel part of this community and I think it's important to reach out to the next generation and to encourage people to actively participate, and that's high on my personal agenda.
.
Related to that is also our work with the trusted contacts. We have two trusted contacts at the moment, Rob Evans and Vesna, you might have seen them around during the week on the various channels, but we would like to add some more, I think it's quite a burden for those two, and we would like to add more, and, also, they will be trained and we'll be working with trusted contacts to find additional candidates. So if you are interested, please contact us and we will work with that.
.
I mean, they might change in the future with the work of the Code of Conduct Task Force, but, for now, I believe it's important to strengthen that team so that they can continue their work.
.
Last but not least, you can contact us, of course, via e‑mail. Here is our e‑mail addresses again, and we are planning to keep you up to date via Labs articles, as we have done in the last few weeks, and on the RIPE list. And that's all from me.
.
We have some time for questions and answers. Are there any comments? Niall, is there anything happening in the chat or in the question and answers that we need to address.

NIALL O'REILLY: Nobody in the microphone queue, and there is nothing in the Q&A. I think we can probably move on to the next speaker, and if we ‑‑ if people think of questions that they wanted to ask now, we can pick them up at the end.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Okay, fair enough. We'll hopefully have some time. The next agenda item is from the RIPE Database Requirements Task Force, and James Kennedy and Shane Kerr, the co‑chairs of that task force, will give you an update, a report. Are you ready?

JAMES KENNEDY: I believe so. Morning, everyone. Hope you are all keeping well. My name is James Kennedy, and I am going to give you an update from the RIPE Database Requirements Task Force. I am joined by Shane, he is going to keep an eye on the chat. We have ten minutes, so, to make the best use of our time, please, if you have any questions throughout the presentation, pop them in the chat and Shane will try and get back to you on the chat there.
.
So who are we, the task force? So you know most of us by now: Nick, myself, Shane, Peter, Sara and Bijal, and we're getting great support from the RIPE NCC via Boris, Maria and Edward, who we sync with frequently and they are joining all of our calls.
.
So, a bit of background information on us.
.
The task force was formed on the back of the big BoF, or the big picture BoF that took place back in RIPE 78. Our ‑‑ we're tasked with basically producing a RIPE document that listed requirements for the RIPE database and the rationales, and I included a link here for basically that the Charter, if you want to review it, it's published, so the information there is about who we are, what we're doing and why.
.
What have we done so far? We have held 20 meetings ‑ three face‑to‑face, two being day‑long workshops, I would say in the RIPE NCC office earlier in the year. We have held a survey with the community earlier in the year, so thanks everybody for feeding us back their information there. So, basically, a big check to see what were the current issues with the database, what were people looking for.
.
We have had also community feedback via the RIPE list, of course, we have held two BoFs, one on Monday and one before the previous RIPE meeting, so, yeah, I'll give you a quick update on what was discussed on Monday. And we have been in discussion with the Database Working Group Chairs, particularly of late.
.
Last month, we had a call with Mirjam, our new RIPE Chair, to sync on the Charter itself and the plans. Particularly we had a look at the time lines, so, it was a bit ambitious considering all that happened this year with the initial timeline to produce the document for this RIPE meeting, but yes, we have adjusted that, and again, it's in the previous link on the previous slide, the updates.
.
As I said, it basically information and data collection so far with support from the NCC.
.
And now we have come to the stage where we published a second draft. It's in the link here, and the main message from this presentation is, please kindly review the draft and provide your feedback, ideally on the RIPE list, the discussion mailing list. You can reach out to us individually, but we prefer to have it open and public and transparent.
.
So, the structure of the document, they outline what we go through. We have a look at what is the RIPE database, of course. The differences between the RIPE database and the RIPE registry. Now, this is a very keep point when referring to any requirements, is to keep in mind that are you referring to RIPE registry, which is maintained by the RIPE NCC for primarily the RIR function, to fulfil its RIR function, and then there's the RIPE database, which is our scope, which is maintained by the community.
.
We also have a look ‑‑ explain why we're looking at the RIPE database functionality now. So, with the lens of, you know, today's users, the users have grown, obviously, since the database's inception quite a few years ago now at this stage, and it became apparent the real need to review what do today's and going forward future users need from the database itself. And then we go through, we explain the requirements, the recommendations, terminology we use in the documents and supporting policy and documents, whatnot.
.
So the core requirements that we have identified and outlined in the documents are in no particular order:
.
Authoritative and accurate registry of Internet number resources.
.
Reverse DNS.
.
Publishing routing policies by network operators. So the Internet Routing Registry function.
.
And, of course, facilitating communication for Internet operation and coordination.
.
So, as I said, Monday we had a BoF. Thanks everyone for joining. The main recommendations we discussed were around resource registration requirements, keeping in mind, you know, the distinction of what's required for, you know, the function of the registry or what's required for the database itself, which is again what we're focusing on.
.
Contact and personal information.
.
Legal address of non‑natural persons.
.
You know, again, keep in mind that we're going to provide ‑‑ we see our document will be providing the high‑level recommendations and then we're not going to build actual policy. That will obviously be done and discussed and built in the Working Groups themselves. So, general feedback from the BoF on Monday.
.
People seemed quite happy with what we have drafted so far and the path we're taking.
.
There was a request for some clarifications on the recommendations themselves. I believe it was Daniel who said that it would be helpful to have more clear distinction again of what's maintained by the RIPE NCC registry and what's maintained by the community.
.
And there was requests for more community participation or feedback, which we obviously support. We also need to keep in mind that we are a task force, not a working group, so we don't have, as such, a discussion mailing list to go through each point as we do in the Working Groups and ‑‑ although we do welcome all feedback on the RIPE list and we also keep in mind that we lost two, unfortunately, face‑to‑face meetings this year; we should be in lovely Italy this week, but here we are.
.
Quick notes on interesting developments on RIPE database.
.
So, in the survey that we carried out earlier this year, the two, well, main ‑‑ the main issues we saw are complaints with the database, were around data accuracy and ease of use. We have seen the same challenges being flagged in the RIPE NCC survey last year. It's good to see that consistency.
.
The goal ‑‑ so this week, there have been two interesting updates, so Felipe, on Wednesday I believe it was, he flagged that the goal of the RIPE NCC, a goal is to increase the accuracy of the registry by practically monitoring changes. I have included a link of his presentation. And yesterday, Ed informed us that the database team is working on improving the ease of use of the database in the user interface. So, you know, it's great to see that these common issues are already being worked on by the NCC.
.
Next steps for the task force.
.
So obviously we're going to continue to develop the document. We're going to take the feedback that we received on Monday and throughout the week and, yeah, anything else on the mailing list we see over the coming weeks, we take that into careful consideration as we develop the documents.
.
We plan to engage with the RIPE NCC's Registration Services department shortly, you know, with a key eye to translate the accuracy desires of the community and see if we can turn that into something actionable or at least recommendable in our document.
.
Possibly, or probably, I'd say, hold a third BoF before we come to the stage of publishing the final draft, I'd say. So just to align with the community, get consensus, discuss any open issues.
.
But if we don't reach consensus, then we need to list the open issues and report it back to the community and then we'll see what the next steps are there.
.
And all going well, we'll publish the final document before the next RIPE meeting, RIPE 82.
.
So keep an eye on your updates. The mailing list: We have a mailing list archive where we publish the minutes of the meetings, key updates, and we'll try to increase the transparency there, of course.
.
So, as I said earlier, we need your feedback. The main takeaway from this presentation is please, please kindly review the documents, the draft document, what we currently have in the link. If you have any comments and any feedback, anything at all, feed back to one of us but preferably please feed back to the RIPE mailing list, link blow, and that's ten minutes.
.
Are there any questions or feedback at this stage?

MIRJAM KUHNE: Thanks James, right on time. We have some time for questions now.

NIALL O'REILLY: You can join the mic or put a question in the Q&A. Nobody is stepping up.

JAMES KENNEDY: There was no big party last night so there is no excuses.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Thanks, James. Thanks for all the good work you have been doing so far as a task force.
.
Next up is the other task force, Code of Conduct Task Force, and I believe you'll have Leo talking about that. There you are.

LEO VEGODA: I'm presenting the work of the Code of Conduct Task Force.
.
So, let me just recap on how we got where we are. The Diversity Task Force, as Mirjam mentioned, updated the current Code of Conduct that is in force now to version 3. There was a discussion about this, and the Code of Conduct Task Force was presented ‑‑ proposed at RIPE 80, the last meeting. We were chartered in mid‑September and this is the Charter we were given.
.
Three key tasks. We have been focusing on task number 1, which is to update version 3 of the Code of Conduct, and this will be a RIPE Code of Conduct for all participation in RIPE.
.
So, this is the membership of the task force. Four members, and we have been very well supported by Athina and Anthony from the RIPE NCC.
.
So, our approach has been to review the discussion that happened about version 3 of the Code of Conduct, and we have used that discussion to start deciding on changes that we would like to propose. So, we have been evaluating the impact of the issues, we have also been looking at other codes of conduct so that we get input from best practice elsewhere.
.
We will use this input to make improvements to what was in version 3 and the next steps are that we will develop version 4 and we will publish that hopefully during November and we will then have an opportunity for community consensus.
.
If there is a community consensus on version 4, we will then proceed to the next two items in our Charter: team selection and reporting and operational procedures.
.
So that is where we are now.
.
We did hope that we would be publishing an update in time for the RIPE meeting. That did ‑‑ that was overly ambitious, so we hope to be publishing our update, the draft version 4, during next month.
.
So, that's the end of the update from the Code of Conduct Task Force. If anyone has any questions, then of course now is the time to ask. Otherwise, if you just want to provide input to the Code of Conduct Task Force, our e‑mail address is coc‑tf [at] ripe [dot] net and we would really come your input by e‑mail or of course you can contact us individually.
.
Thank you very much.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Thank you, Leo. Are there any questions? Niall, do you see anything popping up?

NIALL O'REILLY: Nobody approaching the mic and the Q&A box is empty. I'd like to say well done to Leo and Bijal ‑‑ Leo and Salam and Brian and Denesh and keep up the good work and we look forward to see the draft in November.

LEO VEGODA: Thank you.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Right.

NIALL O'REILLY: There is still nobody at the mic.

MIRJAM KUHNE: This is a typical Friday morning syndrome.

NIALL O'REILLY: Pretty much.

MIRJAM KUHNE: We might ‑‑ it might be early, but that's okay. I also heard from some comments that it would be good to have some more time for interaction and discussion since this worked so well on the Meetecho platform, so maybe at the end of the session, we'll have some more minutes for general feedback. Thanks, Leo. We can move on.
.
Next up is me with the Working Group Chairs Collective document.
.
Recommendations in the chat about making sure I can still see the Meetecho screen but I'm not playing with that right now. I will just share my screen, it's going to be very short.
.
This was one of the recommendations from the Accountability Task Force, recommendation 12, basically saying consider providing an overview of what the Working Group Chairs Collective does as a group and what it is responsible for.
.
And we worked on that. There was a small task force put together within the ‑‑ among the Working Group Chairs, Hans Petter had already initiated this, and they came up with a small document, a short document, and we published that on the list some weeks ago.
.
Basically what it says here, the number of clearly defined tasks, this is really in addition to what the Working Group Chairs do as their tasks as chairs in their particular Working Group. As a collective, they usually meet like during the RIPE meetings, also to provide coordination between the Working Groups, so that there is some consistency and coordination done between the Working Groups and there is constant collaboration between the Chairs, between the meetings but also at the meetings, so we'll have another meeting also after this RIPE 81 meeting to discuss how everything went so they are providing feedback there to the meeting team and to the Chair.
.
And the second defined task is documented in the RIPE Policy Development Process, in the RIPE PDP, and that's actually the appeals procedure where the RIPE Working Group Chairs Collective have a role defined in section 4 in the current PDP, RIPE‑710, and you might have heard during this week for the first time, actually, there was an appeal filed in one of the Working Groups and the Working Group Chairs Collective fulfilled their role as defined in this document.
.
So that worked.
.
And another task they have as a group are certainly liaison functions; for instance, the liaison to the Programme Committee and also others, where needed. There was also liaison sent to the nominating committee for the RIPE Chair. And that's all the defined in this document.
.
There is another role defined recently in the RIPE Chair selection process as described in RIPE‑727, and that's twofold: it's continuity. It's basically ‑‑ and they already ‑‑ there was already a time where they took action there, basically when the whole handover process with Hans Petter and the new Chair, continuity in the terms of defining an interim Chair, basically, in case there is not a RIPE Chair available, it's their responsibility to select an interim Chair and they have basically done this once with Hans Petter over the last few months.
.
Also consultation for the nominating committee in consultation for the RIPE Chair selection.
.
So all this is defined in the document and it's a small document that the Working Group Chairs put together and I have sent this to the RIPE list on the 2nd October, you can read it up there, and please provide any feedback before ‑‑ like, within the next two weeks, before 13th November. And then the aim is to publish it as a RIPE document. We'll probably combine it with the current RIPE document that describes the Working Group Chairs' job description, and we will combine the two so that we'll have one RIPE document describing the tasks for individual chairs plus the whole collective.
.
So if you have any questions now, or on the list later on, please let us know. Is there anything in the queue?

NIALL O'REILLY: No ‑‑ yes.

DANIEL KARRENBERG: Just to have some discussion. I think it's a bad idea to combine too much into a single RIPE document. So, if you want to describe the collective in one document and how a working group is run in another one. Nothing prevents us from writing a little 'how to' for Working Group Chairs. But combining too much into one document means it changes more often, so I would keep them functionally separate. But it's really a minor point. I just wanted to not have the session end without anybody saying anything.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Thanks, Daniel. That's very considerate. Thanks for the suggestion. And that reminds me, we actually also worked on a more informal 'how to' document, and one formal kind of RIPE Working Group Chairs on boarding document, if you will, that we shared with the Working Group Chairs before the meeting with the group to get some feedback. The RIPE NCC has helped write this document. And we will make that available on the website as well, and that's really meant for also to attract new Chairs and basically provide a bit more information of what it means to be a Working Group Chair, what are the tasks during the meeting, what does it mean to Chair the Working Group, consensus, in some more detail than what's currently in the pure job description of the Working Group Chair.
.
But I hear you, so maybe we should keep all these separate and just basically reference them. We'll think ‑‑

DANIEL KARRENBERG: The formal procedures, keep them separate as much as possible. Thank you very much.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Any other comments, questions, also for the other presenters maybe? We have some time for the coffee break.

NIALL O'REILLY: I see Dmitry Scherbakov in the microphone queue. Let's let him in and see what his question is.

DMITRY SCHERBAKOV: Hello, everybody. I agree with the previous speakers. It's need to make more separation in the documents what we discussed at general meetings. They are good things which can show which problem is how a resolution number 3, where it was a lot of needed changes ‑‑

NIALL O'REILLY: Dmitry, I have to cut you off, I am sorry. This is not a forum for discussing the affairs of the General Meeting. That's to do with the RIPE NCC, and this is a Community Plenary. Hans Petter Holen wants to have a word.

HANS PETTER HOLEN: Thank you. I have heard loud and clear the concerns from the previous speaker and I also received an e‑mail from him, and I would actually encourage both the board and the community to actually listen a bit more, because some of the concerns he raises is that there has really not been any place to discuss matters of importance for the members and the community, and what he brought up in the GM was scarcity of IP addresses and what that means for new members. That is not covered at all in the activity plan, and it's not the focus of any of the Working Groups yet because we are simply saying migrate to v6, while that may not be that simple for everybody.
.
So I think to follow up on what Mirjam said at the beginning here, we need to be accommodating and we need to figure out how to create a venue for these discussions. This may not be the right forum here now, but I think we need to look at, moving forward, how to actually have these discussions and share the experiences that we have also with people who have not been part of this community and discussion for a very long time. That's just what I wanted to add. Thank you.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Can I add something, just one or two responses quickly to Hans Petter. Thanks for this suggestion and you're right, I have heard this also during the week that we maybe, especially now in this virtual environment, we need some more space to discuss topics that come up in the community and in this case, since we don't have scheduled this for now and we don't have enough time to discuss this, I would suggest the possibility of bringing this up on the RIPE list and starting a discussion there and see if it fits in any of the Working Groups.

NIALL O'REILLY: Eileen Gallagher.
.

EILEEN GALLAGHER: Mirjam, so your point regarding the Working Groups, I really just wanted to come in on that one, and you mentioned there about perhaps creating better documentation around what the role of the Working Groups are and what the role of the Working Groups Chairs, and I think that's a fabulous idea. I think it's ‑‑ we recently had a panel about diversity and attracting different people and this goes back to your early discussion about the Working Groups and, you know, attracting more people to them. We recently had a discussion among the Euro‑IX community, and one of the things that Nurani brought up at that was, one of the reasons that some people, particularly women, don't go forward for things is if they don't know the total workload they are signing up for. They afraid to sign up for something that takes up more time and they can't do a brilliant job on it. I think that's a fabulous idea. I think if there are techniques and skills, then perhaps time within a RIPE meeting should be dedicated to spreading those skills in terms of gaining consensus, would be a wonderful session at a RIPE meetings, to actually push those skills out as far as we can through the community.
.
I missed the one earlier on when you were talking about attracting more people to the Working Groups. Again, another point that was brought up in our Euro‑IX event on diversity, was around the idea of creating space, and part of creating space is also initiating term limits for things like Working Groups, and, you know, once that's in place, people don't want to try and displace somebody who has been in a role for a long time. There is the fear of the unknown, there is the fear of not being successful and there is a load of other fears which actually put people off going forward. And perhaps term limit is a way of actually overcoming that issue, and also creating space. So perhaps those who are in Working Groups, or leading Working Groups, who have done it for many years, could actually take the role of mentor for the next Working Group Chair, I think that would be a magnanimous thing for people to do who are clearly good at being Working Group Chairs, but they have done it for a while. Now hand on the baton to the next one. That's it, really. So thank you for taking on ‑‑ of actually documenting what the role is and documenting the workload as well. I think that's a great idea.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Thanks, Eileen. I think these are really great suggestions. I just took some notes. I see some of the Working Group Chairs have taken initiative now to attract trainee Chairs, if you will, so that they don't have to carry the full burden, but they kind of run with the Working Group Chairs for a while and then kind of grow, maybe, possibly, into the role and can still decide later on if they want to take on the full role or not. They are good suggestions, thanks.

NIALL O'REILLY: Before we go to coffee, Daniel can have the microphone for a few seconds. Daniel? He is gone from the queue. Oh, he is back again.

DANIEL KARRENBERG: Unknown technical difficulty. Just before coffee, I just want to expand on what Hans Petter said. What I'm seeing here is that this guy, Dmitry, who some of us perceive as a nuisance, but I see as someone who tries to find a forum for his concern, and he gets sort of into a catch‑22 situation because we know some formal differences between RIPE and the RIPE NCC and he doesn't understand that. Maybe he doesn't want to understand them, I don't know. But I think I would ask the Chairs to work with him to give him the forum and maybe if there is ‑‑ if they can find some people who have similar concerns, to start a BoF on this next time or something. We shouldn't be seen, as a combined community of RIPE and RIPE NCC, of just brushing people off, and I get that impression, however nuisanced we might feel about this.

MIRJAM KUHNE: Thank you, Daniel. I know the RIPE NCC has contacted Dmitry to find out about his concerns, but I'll take your point. Maybe we will be working with him in the RIPE NCC to find out if there is anything more we can do.

And this brings us right to the coffee break. I am glad you had some time for discussion, and then I hope to see you all back after the coffee break for the second part of this Community Plenary and then the Closing Plenary right after.
.
(Coffee break)