[ppml] Effects of explosive routing table growth on ISP behavior

[Nigel Titley]

michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
>> It is worth pointing out that in different regions this is 
>> handled differently.  For instance, RIPE handles both the 
>> functions of Nanog and of ARIN as a single org.
>>     
>
> Nope. RIPE and RIPE NCC are two separate orgs with separate
> budgets and management. They may hold joint meetings more 
> often than ARIN/NANOG, but they are not integrated as you
> have assumed.
>   
To be slightly more precise: RIPE is the body which makes policy. It has 
no budget and no formal membership. It is run as a number of working 
groups, loosely coordinated by the RIPE Chair. It periodically (twice 
yearly) meets up in a conference which has two parts: the European 
Operators Forum (which roughly corresponds to NANOG), and the Working 
Groups, which roughly correspond to the ARIN meeting. The RIPE NCC is a 
not for profit organisation which performs the RIR function in Europe, 
and executes the policy decided by RIPE. It is exactly analogous to 
ARIN, except that the RIPE NCC board takes no part in the development of 
policy but is merely concerned with the commercial sound operation of 
the RIPE NCC. So in a sense, there is no such thing as a RIPE NCC 
meeting joint or otherwise. The whole thing is confused by the fact that 
the RIPE NCC organises the RIPE meeting.

I'm sure that isn't clearer, but then....

Nigel