Deletion of .de domain objects

Ppl, look, why do I need to have in my mailbox this spam about .de
domains??? At least in .ee it's of no interest! Stop sending cc:'s to
local-ir at ripe.net, move to private!

rgds
--
Konstantin Barinov, Senior Network Manager
INFONET AS, http://infonet.ee, sbr at infonet.ee


On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Stephen Burley wrote:

> Michael Holzt wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 02:38:12PM +0200, Thorsten Schreiner wrote:
> > > I think they want to become a BIG player... but actually can't right
> >
> > I cannot understand why the DENIC doesn't help funding with one central ripe
> > database instead of setting up a own system. The usability and work of the
> > ripe database was the best database ever, with automated robot for updates
> > within minutes and a very good maintainer scheme.
> 
> That ones easy, it should never have been used for this info RIPE is the rIPe
> repository not the domains authority. The only domains that are in there are
> the reverse domains for very good reasons. The RIPE DB was seen as an easy
> route to a publicly accessable system with minimum effort, the fact these
> domains are now going away will take the strain off a system which was never
> designed to for this use and so give the RIPE community back the level of
> response from the servers/systems the community funded and frankly deserve.
> 
> Regards
> Stephen Burley
> UUNET EMEA Hostmaster
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > I just got response from the denic regarding my questions about future
> > updates to handles. As it seems the change of Handles will now only be
> > possible for members of the Denic eG, so many smaller providers who aren't
> > members, but are buying their domains from another one will have to redirect
> > all changes to this member. I treat this as a very brain-damaged system.
> >
> > In the meanwhile we have Handles with the same key XYZ-RIPE, with different
> > contents in RIPE-db and DeNIC-db (not only the missing remarks, but also
> > phone and fax, and if someone makes changes to one of the two handles the
> > other will keep the old data).
> >
> > And then the past changes of the DeNIC to set unmaintained Handles under
> > their own Maintainer DENIC-P is abusive usage of the ripe database in my
> > eyes. They had no permission to change our handles and the change made no
> > sense, as the DeNIC won't support maintainers in their own database as
> > mentioned above.
> >
> > Why has this mess had to happen?
> >
> > --
> > Mit freundlichen Gr|_en / with kind regards
> >
> > Michael Holzt
> 
>