[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] The Future of the RIPE Database Proxy Service

not entirely sure what a 'ripe database proxy service' would be... but it 
sounds like one of those 'too much fucking info' things that once were
in fashion when the internet was a bunch of dusty nerds... and the only 
threat was a bunch of scriptkiddies in poland. and now, its a 
hostile environment and any 'database' should be closed access only.

as seriously, if people wanna harras your clients, or even worse (and 
wrongly: you) at least they should take the time and effort to get proper 
court orders... not just do a 'whois' on some database which should not 
even exist anymore due to the fact that its not compliant with ANY 
applicable privacy laws.


-- 

MINISTRY OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
==================================================
Government House,
One CyberBunker Avenue,
RCB-31337,
Republic CyberBunker.


On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Nick Hilliard wrote:

> On 11/03/2013 14:27, Alex Le Heux wrote:
>> Are we seriously having a multi-month discussion involving numerous
>> emails from the CEO of the RIPE NCC about a service that has *four*
>> active users?
>
> If this were a commercial organisation and if it were my choice, I would
> pull the plug tomorrow.  Actually, I would have pulled it years ago because
> I have a strong dislike for underused fossils, particularly those which
> actively cost time and resources to maintain.  But it's not a commercial
> organisation - it's a monopoly whose purpose is to serve a bunch of people
> what they want to be served on the basis of general bottom-up consensus,
> and the rules are different.
>
> Unfortunately, it seems there was a top-down cockup which spilled into
> nanog-l and caused a small amount of froth to fly.  When this happens, it's
> sensible to put your hand up and confess that yes, there was a cockup and
> there were no bad intentions and that as a matter of good will to the
> community, whatever was done would be undone.  Otherwise, it will be
> remembered years later that the RIPE NCC did all of this mean, bad and
> horrible stuff to the community once upon a time and they're a monopolistic
> power hungry bunch, not answerable to the community and yadda-yadda-yadda.
> Fortunately, this reaction is as avoidable as it is predictable.
>
> The RIPE NCC have done the right thing by going back to their membership
> and asking them for consensus on a policy.  I put forward a particular
> opinion on the basis that it's probably best right now to go back to the
> original configuration (i.e. contract/free in this case) and leave things
> settle down for a while so that people realise that the RIPE NCC is not the
> enemy.
>
> Some time down the road, I'd probably be quite supportive of the idea of
> asking the RIPE NCC to approach the 4 existing users of the service and ask
> them if there was any other way that their requirements could be
> facilitated which involved lower overhead/cost.  I.e. engagement with user
> community, followed by general consensus, followed by action which has
> broad support from constituency.
>
> Otherwise I agree that this is a storm in a teacup which merits only a tiny
> fraction of the amount of attention it's getting.
>
> How are you enjoying consensus from the other side, then?  :-D
>
> Nick
>
>
> ----
> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss
> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page:
> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
>
> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
>