Hans Petter, thanks for this update from your side. However, I'm a bit puzzled about this section:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 6:12 AM Hans Petter Holen <[email protected]> wrote: > [...] > We are also open about our interactions with both governments and the ITU. > Just last week, we published a detailed article about our work at the > recent ITU Plenipotentiary in Romania[1]. And for the sake of clarity, I > will confirm that at the ITU meeting, we were approached by a Dutch > government representative who invited US and UK government representatives > to discuss the AFRINIC situation. At that meeting, I introduced them to the > AFRINIC CEO, and he gave an update. I do not think that this was > inappropriate or should come as a surprise. The RIPE NCC position on this > is still the same as we published last year[2]. > [...] > I thought that the RIPE wanted to mostly stay out of this matter, but you introduce the government representatives (which approached you) to the AFRINIC "CEO" - which is one of the main party of the dispute to give him a chance to present his side without the other side present. This sounds to me as a very bad move. I would have rather seen if you would have given a mostly neutral update with the claims from both sides. (I'm also putting "CEO" in quotes as I thought that at this time, he was practically suspended in his function by court order. But might be wrong there) Curious on what I'm missing here to understand your actions. Regards, Martin Winter
-- 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
