From olaf at ripe.net Thu Mar 4 17:33:01 2004 From: olaf at ripe.net (Olaf M. Kolkman) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:33:01 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] FYI: Cleanup of domain objects. Message-ID: <20040304173301.101da1de.olaf@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, Excuxes for the duplicate messages. During the third week of March we will perform the cleanup as described in section B of the "Domain Cleanup Proposal"[1]. Users affected by this cleanup were contacted during the first week of January 2004[2]. Once the domain object cleanup has been finished, the RIPE NCC provisioning system will be migrated to generate reverse zones from the whois database. We will proceed with that around the last week of March 2004. This change should be transparent. A small notification will be sent to the dns-wg mailing list. The next step of the RDNS project [3] will be the introduction of the "mnt-domain:" attribute. More information about this introduction will be sent to the ncc-services-wg and dns-wg mailing lists by the end of March 2004. Please reply to me in private or to the mailing list if you have any questions or comments. --Olaf Kolkman New Projects RIPE NCC [1] http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/db-wg/2003/msg00738.html [2] The set of people contacted was larger than the set of people actually affected by the cleanup see http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/db-wg/2004/msg00086.html for details. [3] http://www.ripe.net/reverse/rdns-project/ From reaction at optionalreaction.net Thu Mar 11 12:30:47 2004 From: reaction at optionalreaction.net (reaction at optionalreaction.net) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:30:47 +0300 Subject: [dns-wg] DNS registrant details... Message-ID: <1079004647.40504de72d752@mail.valuehost.co.uk> Hello, This is my first post to this mailing list. When a person or persons register a domain name, a clear distinction should be made to exclusively identify a difference between input of credit card details and input of domain name registrant details. There are some large companies that 'automatically' use the entered credit card details, as the address of the registrant a domain name. This, as is true in my case, depending on the content of the domain names associated website(s), may lead to someone having to physical location because _they were not aware that domain registrant address details had been taken from their credit card details_. Regards, optionalreaction.net (webmaster) From pk at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Thu Mar 11 12:47:02 2004 From: pk at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:47:02 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] DNS registrant details... In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:30:47 +0300." <1079004647.40504de72d752@mail.valuehost.co.uk> Message-ID: <200403111147.i2BBl2313639@grimsvotn.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> Hello, > When a person or persons register a domain name, a clear distinction should be > made to exclusively identify a difference between input of credit card details > and input of domain name registrant details. yes, many if not most registries indeed provide for different contacts, e.g. administrative, technical, zone -- and billing. > This, as is true in my case, depending on the content of the domain names > associated website(s), may lead to someone having to physical location because > _they were not aware that domain registrant address details had been taken from > their credit card details_. I'm missing the verb in that statement and my guess is "change" or "hide", but what's your point? > Regards, > optionalreaction.net (webmaster) BTW, participants on this list prefer to identify themselves by name ... -Peter From jim at rfc1035.com Thu Mar 11 13:17:54 2004 From: jim at rfc1035.com (Jim Reid) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:17:54 +0000 Subject: [dns-wg] DNS registrant details... In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:30:47 +0300." <1079004647.40504de72d752@mail.valuehost.co.uk> Message-ID: <15290.1079007474@gromit.rfc1035.com> >> When a person or persons register a domain name, a clear >> distinction should be made to exclusively identify a difference >> between input of credit card details and input of domain name >> registrant details. And your point is.....? AFAIK most registries and registrars make that distinction already. Whenever I've registered a domain name, I've always been asked for the admin and tech details before payment info was requested. IIRC some (US based) registrars didn't even ask for address info about the credit card that was used. >> This, as is true in my case, depending on the content of the >> domain names associated website(s), may lead to someone having >> to physical location because _they were not aware that domain >> registrant address details had been taken from their credit >> card details_. So what? Many people don't realise what evil is caused by accepting cookies from web sites. Or that personal details for a domain's technical and admin contacts can end up in a public whois database. This is essentially an education problem. If you think that the WG needs to do something in this area, please write up a draft and post it. If there's enough interest, it can be discussed at the WG and a document produced. This could be a BCP. Or it might be enough to come up with a recommendation to registrars and registries that they should separate credit card info from any admin and tech contact data that's maintained for a domain name. Since you've identified the potential problem, I think you're best placed to get the ball rolling by writing up a draft for the WG to consider. Over to you... BTW, this WG and mailing list works openly. Anonymous contributions should only be made when there is an obvious and convincing reason for privacy. From jim at rfc1035.com Mon Mar 22 16:52:00 2004 From: jim at rfc1035.com (Jim Reid) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:52:00 +0000 Subject: [dns-wg] Agenda Items for RIPE48 Message-ID: <7686.1079970720@gromit.rfc1035.com> Contributions and suggestions for the DNS WG Agenda at RIPE48 are now invited. Please let dns-wg-chair at ripe.net know if you have a presentation or topic for discussion at the WG. It will help the planning if you do this sooner rather than later. Last time, a couple of interesting items were suggested after the Agenda had been finalised. Sigh. The closing date for input to the Agenda is likely to be around April 16th: two weeks before RIPE48. From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Thu Mar 25 12:46:41 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:46:41 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] EOF, Amsterdam, May - Call for Presentations Message-ID: <20040325114641.GF7650@dhcp-17.karrenberg.net> [apologies for duplicates, hint: they have the same message-id] Hi Network Operations Folk, NOW is the time to consider making a presentation at the European Operators Forum (EOF) to be held during the 48th RIPE meeting in Amsterdam on Monday 3rd and Tuesday 4th of May 2004. We would like to have as many practical, hands-on presentations as possible this time. Remember: They do not have to be long. We prefer an stand-up interesting 10 minute presentation over a well prepared 90 minutes explanation of something not so interesting to operators. Find some information about presenting below and think about all those experiences this year that might be interesting to other operators. Should you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me by e-mail at any time. Thanks Daniel -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Information about the EOF and presenting there: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-48/eof.html Information about the meeting in general: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-48/index.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Guidelines for submitting abstracts: We expect to finalise the program in shortly. We will get back to you then with scheduling details. In the meantime please provide the information below. We place special emphasis on the abstract which should contain references to related material already available if possible. Please send this to eof-coord at-sign ripe.net. - Author(s) - Speaker - (Working) Title - Abstract - Draft Presentation (if available) - Relation to other known work and/or presentations if known - Time Requested It would be helpful if the abstract was written such that potential attenders will learn what to expect from the presentation, i.e. "The presentation will describe our experiences with the Red Packet Washer (http://www.netdet.net/RPW/). We have been using the device for half a year now. It helps us deliver more hygienic datagrams to our customers and peers. We will discuss problems with packet discolouring as well as increased throughput to our upstreams due to decreased clogging by dirty micrograms. We will compare performance with the hand-scrubbing of packets which we used previously. Currently we are optimising device management and getting bugs resolved. We will strive to include the latest experiences in our report." is much better than "The presentation will describe the Red Packet Washer made by Network Detergents."