[db-wg] Draft Minutes for DB-WG RIPE 50

["Titley, Nigel" <]

Gentlefolk,

Apologies for the lateness of these minutes. My only excuse is that I wasn't
there, but I must emphasise that the scribe did actually pass on the minutes
straight after the meeting.

On the positive side, the only action that came out of the meeting was on
Wilfried, so you can all breathe easily (apart from Wilfried).

Best regards

Nigel

-- 
Nigel Titley
Peering Coordinator, FLAG Telecom
+44 20 8564 5812



**********************************************************************
This e-mail message is confidential and is intended only for the use of the
individual or entity named above and contains information which is or may be
confidential, non-public or legally privileged. Any dissemination or
distribution of this message other than to its intended recipient is
strictly prohibited. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose 
the contents to any other person. If you have received this message in error, please
notify us by email to postmaster@localhost immediately and delete the
original message and all copies from all locations in your computer systems.


This e-mail has been swept by Mailsweeper TM for viruses. However, FLAG
Telecom cannot accept liability for any damage which you may sustain as a
result of software viruses.
**********************************************************************

  



This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl - www.mailcontrol.com
Database Working Group Draft Minutes from RIPE 50
RIPE Meeting 50 in Stockholm
Thursday 5th May 2005 - 9h00 - 10h30
Scribe: Flora Robin

Agenda:

A. Administrative Matters

    * scribe
    * list of participants
    * agenda
    * minutes
    * "remote participation" coordination (if needed)

B. DB Update (Shane Kerr, RIPE NCC)

C. Changes in the DB for "abuse" stuff (Shane Kerr, RIPE NCC)

D. Country attribute: status/value (Wilfried Woeber)

Y. Input from other WGs
- "whois2005" from Address Policy?

Z. AOB


---------------------------


A. Administrative Matters

Scribe: Flora Robin (RIPE NCC)

Jabber scribe: Oleg Muravskiy (RIPE NCC)

Minutes from the previous WG session approved.


Outstanding Actions


46.5	WW		Coordinate with RIPE NCC to prepare a document 
			summarizing basic assumptions about the use of the database. 
                	[Should be checked with the Address Policy WG and RIPE NCC, Ongoing]

47.3	RIPE NCC	Write a document properly documenting the use of the
			IRT object for reporting abuse.
			[Ongoing]


48.2	Shane Kerr	To publish the CRISP/Joint-Whois requirements on the DB WG list.
			[Complete]

48.6	RIPE NCC	To change DB behaviour to return IRT object
			[Complete]

48.7	RIPE NCC	To make the PGP attribute optional on the IRT object

49.1	RIPE NCC	To convey new database abuse contact 
	Anti-Spam WG	behaviour to the anti-spam tool writing community
			[RIPE-NCC has contacted over 100 people, Complete]

49.2	RIPE NCC	Give updates about the number of abuse records
			in the database to the Working Group.
			[Ongoing]

49.3	RIPE NCC	To produce a document detailing the programme for 
			introducing the abuse contact changes.
			[Complete]

49.4	RIPE NCC	To implement the abuse-email: attribute in the irt, 
			person and role objects.
			[Complete]


---------------------------

B. DB Update 

Presented by : Shane Kerr, RIPE NCC

Peter Koch was pretty happy about the new poem object but was concerned about 
intellectual property.

Wilfred wondered about the status of CRISP and why aren't the RIR happy about the requirements?
Shane: IETF wants the requirement document to be done before the protocol is redesigned, 
rather than the other way around. This would allow to choose between different possibilities.
Currently, the requirements are done for the address lookup part, but not much more has been done.
The protocol is as well almost complete.
Wilfried: Who is involved from the RIRs?
George Michael from APNIC, and ARIN and RIPE NCC


Wilfred: Could something be done to make it easy for a human being to get email 
addresses out of the database but not for scripts?
Peter Koch suggests to fake the e-mail address so that it can not be used automatically,
but this won't probably work.
Shane: The recent changes to abuse should hopefully reduce this problem as you don't 
get the changed lines anymore when you only query for an IP address.


---------------------------

C. Changes in the DB for "abuse" stuff (RIPE NCC) [~15 min]

Presented by : Shane Kerr, RIPE NCC

Q: Did the hint string (something that would look like an email address)
got implemented?
A: not for now

Q: Shall we let the last changed line?
A: There has been lots of proposals about how to change the 'changed' attribute, but it's not 
so easy.
Q: What about allowing nic-handles?

Q: Using -r flag with an IP address, you only get inetnum objects and no role or maintainer, so there
is no abuse-mailbox. Shall we add abuse-mailbox to inetnum and inet6num?
A: yes, that's a good idea

Q: What about using -c for getting abuse info?
A: But in this case, in which order?

Q: By now, when people are trying to do updates, they copy and paste the output returned by whois. 
But this output is now filtered, so they remove all the changed lines by mistake. 
Would it be usefull to have a remark attribute to notify them?
A: They could use webupdates or use the specific flag for getting everything

Q: Are there any statistics about how it goes?
A: not yet but this happened 

C: People that are using -r flags know what they are doing, so this is not an argument to 
put this 'abuse-mailbox' attribute on inetnum objects.


---------------------------

C. Country attribute: status/value

Presented by : Wilfried Woeber

This was an open discussion to take decisions.

The country attribute is mandatory for inetnum and inet6num objects, 
but what does it mean exactly?  Postal address of the registry, countries 
where it is implemented or where the IP addresses are used... ?

As someone with a very strong opinion is not here so we should bring that to the mailing list.
[AP 50.1][WW]

Q: Who uses this attributes?
Organisations like Google. So would/should we mind to annoy them?
Shall we break a big block and see what will happen.

C: Someone tried to contact google concerning this issue but they didn't came back to him.

Q: Shall we document how to not to use the country code?
A: The changed line was documented, but this hasn't been helpfull.

Maybe the country attribute shouldn't be used for locating services.

If the country attribute is mandatory, that means that we force them to put it.
So it should be optional, so that they can choose to fill it in or not.

This information is already in the org object, so it should be optional.


Proposal: make it optional and multiple

Shane Kerr: We had a consensus for making it optional, 
but the Address Policy WG was completly against.

Show hands: one person against the proposal (no reason), everybody else agrees.


---------------------------


Y. Input from other WGs

No input as this is the first WG.


Z. AOB

No other business.