- Meynell told BTW Media that low voter turnout during the recent Executive Board elections was a great concern, with only 5% of RIPE members casting a vote.
- He also said that the unwritten obstacles to winning a place on the board, such as a lack of term limits and the need to have long involvement with the RIPE community, should be addressed.
Talking exclusively to BTW Media shortly after his Executive Board election defeat at RIPE 90 in Lisbon, Portugal, Kevin Meynell, Community Engagement Manager at the SCION Association and long-time participant in the RIPE community, shares his thoughts on the present and future of Internet governance, the structural challenges facing the Regional Internet Registry (RIR) system, and the future of the RIPE NCC.
With over 25 years of experience, Meynell offers a perspective on topics ranging from funding sustainability and number resource management to electoral processes and the need for stronger community engagement.
—
The upcoming AFRINIC elections have shone a light on the electoral process over there – where NOG engineers and other non-executive people were able to to cast votes on behalf of numerous organizations themselves, simply by using their login criteria. This will change this year, and each vote will require a signed notarized document in order to be eligible. RIPE NCC and the other RIRs also seem to operate votes in this old manner, which raises the question of vote eligibility, and the potential for electoral fraud. Do you think this simple login system for casting votes is secure enough for these elections at RIPE NCC?
Meynell: It’s perhaps something to consider, although I’ve not really heard any concerns about the integrity of the RIPE NCC voting process. There are due diligence checks when organisations or persons become RIPE NCC members, and they are then able to nominate their voting representatives in a reasonably secure manner.
Of course, no system is perfect, but that is rarely the case anywhere. The checks and security processes have had to be improved over the years, and I’m sure it’s the case that some organisations may not have reviewed for some time who is casting votes on their behalf. However, I think the low levels of voter participation is the bigger issue, and making it more complicated or difficult to vote will likely further discourage turnout.
Do you think engineers are the best people to cast votes in this way, or would it be preferable if company executives, CEOs, CTOs etc had more say and awareness of these matters?
Meynell: Regardless of whether it might be preferable or not, I think the choice of person who gets to cast votes can realistically only be decided by each RIPE NCC member. It would too complicated and difficult to mandate who in a company should be eligible, far less enforce. Unfortunately, I think RIPE NCC matters will simply not be a particularly high priority for many organisations and therefore not something that will be dealt with by C-level executives.
Do you think the election at RIPE NCC this year (and in the past) was influenced by this voting process? Ie an ‘old guard’ of the internet community casting votes, making it tricky for younger newcomers to be elected?
Meynell: Well I’m not that young either! I think there are a number of reasons why it’s difficult for younger ‘newcomers’ to be elected, including a lack of term limits and the need to have long involvement with the RIPE community. Some of these things you can easily address, for others it’s harder, even though I do believe the RIPE community needs to encourage younger leadership.
Do you think your own election result might have been different if the vote was a much more purely member-driven vote, representing the will of the whole community, rather than how the vote is run currently?
Meynell: It was a member driven vote, although I think less than 5% of the RIPE NCC members voted which is a bit of a concern. Perhaps more incentives need to be provided to encourage a better turnout, although I really don’t know whether it would have made any difference in my case.
You have been involved with the RIPE community for over 25 years and now serve as Community Engagement Manager at the SCION Association. How have these experiences shaped your perspective on internet governance and community collaboration?
Meynell: I feel RIPE has been good for community collaboration over the years, and from my perspective the number resource aspect of Internet governance was established with more community consensus than other aspects such as domain names. Of course, with the run down in IPv4 addresses there have been more discussions around how to assign the remaining blocks in an equitable manner, but the simple equation is there are not enough IPv4 addresses to supply global demand and as a result it is inevitable that commercial forces will come into play.
The world is also now changing – not only with the downturn in the Internet industry, but the challenges of more insular geopolitics and conflict as well. I do feel parts of the RIR ecosystem have been slow to respond to these challenges at times, including having processes to deal with the effective failure of one of the RIRs.
In your candidate statement, you mention that the RIR system is facing unprecedented challenges, ranging from geopolitical sanctions to questions around sustainable funding models. What do you see as the most pressing structural issue facing the RIPE NCC today?
Meynell: I believe the most pressing challenge is the current economics of the Internet industry, increasing consolidation of LIRs as well as the difficulty in collecting member fees from certain sanctioned countries. This is putting pressure on revenues at a time of increasing costs, which in turn is contributing to less consensus amongst RIR members as they discuss how revenues should be most effectively spent.
Several sessions at RIPE 90 touched on transparency, financial sustainability and evolving service priorities. What do you think the RIPE NCC should do to better align its services with the diverse needs of its service region?
Meynell: For much of its history, the RIPE NCC has experienced increasing revenue and as a non-profit association it can only put so much of the surpluses into the reserves. It therefore developed and operated services such as RIPE Atlas that are of wider use to the Internet community.
For various reasons though, revenues are now only approximating the costs of running the RIPE NCC, so it may be necessary to consider whether the cost of certain services can be shared with other organisations, whether the likes of a common RIR database would be more cost effective, or whether other efficiencies can be made.
It’s a difficult juggling act as there will always be diverse opinions about this within the RIPE NCC membership, and it will also depend on the willingness of other organisations to financially contribute. Ultimately though, what happens will be determined by levels of revenue and how much the RIPE NCC members are prepared to pay.
Looking ahead, what role do you envisage playing in helping the RIPE NCC to navigate these challenges?
Meynell: Well, unfortunately I wasn’t successful in being elected to RIPE NCC Board. I’ll no doubt continue to provide input and feedback to the Board whether through formal or informal feedback, such as the ICP-2 discussions.
There has also been some discussion around the ICP-2 revision and the portability of number resources, both of which could influence the future of the RIR system. What is your view on these issues? Do you think we are heading in the right direction?
Meynell: I think we need to separate the issues of ICP-2 which deals with RIR governance from the portability of number resources. I have stated during the ICP-2 review process that I believe there needs to be stronger global governance, more independent oversight (particularly with respect to RIR performance) as well as better technical and policy coordination within the RIR system. I also believe it should be easier for particular regions to establish new RIRs if the stakeholder communities there are supportive of this. I do not think ICP-2 is the right document to deal with number resource policies or operational requirements.
