In Budapest I was approached by somebody who wanted to talk about the recent Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that NCC had signed with Russia, the Russian Ministry of Mass Communications.
I was also aware that NCC had become a member of AIOTI (the Alliance for IoT Innovation). Now of course I think it is a good thing that NCC is committing staff and funding to outreach and liaison activities. Indeed I was instrumental in getting NCC involved with CEPT as part of their preparations for the ITU plenipotentiary in Korea. There seem to be though an increasing number of agreements and memberships and they differ in style and intent. Some appear to be almost housekeeping agreements as the respective communities already overlap enough. Some seem there to provide a sort of framework to allow NCC to work more closely with particular organisations and indeed make a financial contribution. Others are perhaps a bit more political. https://www.ripe.net/about-us/what-we-do/engagement-external-organisations All good stuff. And Paul and others - Chris? Marco? Nurani? - have done an excellent job in reporting what has been going on.But I think that given the increasing number and diversity of such activities it would be good if we could more clearly anchor them within the community. Reporting in a plenary is obviously good. But discussion in a WG is maybe good too. Some of this has been implicit to an extent. The Cooperation WG has been the sort of default. When Richard forwarded the Wannacrypt email from EuroPol though he also sent it to Anti-Abuse. And if we have an IOT WG then perhaps what NCC is doing with AIOTI could be reported there. I had seen Cooperation as being home for the EIF, the Round-Table, CEPT and general ITU matters. I had thought the Russian MoU would be there too but I was told Database would be better. Cool! I don’t think this has to be a big deal. We just have to be clearer - which WG mailing lists? which WG sessions? - where NCC will report on activities which are part of any agreement. Can NCC make an initial proposal? In cooperation with the appropriate WG chairs? This is about increasing the sense of participation by the community, through discussions in WGs, in what NCC is doing on their behalf. Gordon PS I think it would be good if NCC gave us a heads up on this list when they were considering concluding an agreement and then when they actually had an agreement.
