From john at ripe.net Thu Jun 1 12:34:44 2000 From: john at ripe.net (John LeRoy Crain) Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 12:34:44 +0200 Subject: Public Holiday Message-ID: <200006011034.MAA15323@birch.ripe.net> Dear colleagues, We apologise for the late announcement, no excuses just our oversight:-( The RIPE NCC is closed today, June 1st, due to a Dutch public Holiday. The office will be open again tomorrow. Sorry for any inconvenience. Yours (from Bologna:) John Crain Head Internal Services RIPE NCC From heidrich at mail.deltav.hu Fri Jun 2 11:06:55 2000 From: heidrich at mail.deltav.hu (Heidrich Attila) Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 11:06:55 +0200 Subject: RIPE-36 Message-ID: <3937792F.EFDA1C69@mail.deltav.hu> Hi! Does anyone have digital photos from the meeting? Can I find the material of the last (Secret WG) session anywhere? -- ( Y ) (o-o) www.deltav.hu/~heidrich (")_(")o heidrich at mail.deltav.hu X-NCC-RegID: hu.deltav From mally at theplanet.net Fri Jun 2 10:59:08 2000 From: mally at theplanet.net (Mally Mclane) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:59:08 +0100 Subject: RIPE-36 Message-ID: <6BF1C330AF53D311BE5D00508B090810036F0A48@PLANET01> photos: http://photos.jml.net I'll be putting mine up when I wander into town and get them developed. regards, mally mclane =>hostmaster/core systems =>for the Planet Online, Leeds, UK =>mally at theplanet.net <> www.theplanet.net =>t: +44(0)1132076624 <> m: +44(0)7787100695 > -----Original Message----- > From: Heidrich Attila [mailto:heidrich at mail.deltav.hu] > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 10:07 AM > To: LIR Mailing List > Subject: RIPE-36 > > > Hi! > > Does anyone have digital photos from the meeting? > Can I find the material of the last (Secret WG) session anywhere? > > -- > ( Y ) > (o-o) www.deltav.hu/~heidrich > (")_(")o heidrich at mail.deltav.hu > X-NCC-RegID: hu.deltav > From pgl at petrel.net Fri Jun 2 10:42:07 2000 From: pgl at petrel.net (Pascal Gloor) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:42:07 +0200 Subject: "ownership" on ancient network assignments? Message-ID: <22CF090CD80ED41189CE00E018C23A00E4D4@amonra.petrel.ch> Hi, Perhaps the best way is to split it in two /17 or 3 /18 and 1 /18 no ? (depending of the need of each ... ) Or on of the two should perhaps ask for a new assignement ... Any other suggestions ? Or perhaps get the /16 by playing a chess game ? :-P Cheers, Pascal Gloor Network Manager (AS6893) __________________________ SPAN(tm) / Petrel Communications SA A Cable & Wireless company Phone : +41 22 304 47 47 Fax : +41 22 304 47 99 Direct : +41 22 304 47 82 Mobile : +41 79 346 00 26 E-mail : Web : > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexander Bochmann [SMTP:bochmann at freinet.de] > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:54 PM > To: lir-wg at ripe.net > Subject: "ownership" on ancient network assignments? > > Hi, > > we are currently noticing a dispute of two companies over a > /16 address range assigned to a predecessor of both of them > in 1991 (the original company was split some time ago). > > We're not a party in this quarrel, but I'm curious about the > status of a network that was assigned such a (comparatively) > long time ago. Can someone claim to be legally entitled to own > this IP address range? What is likely to happen? > > A. Bochmann > > -- > FreiNet Gesellschaft fuer Informationsdienste mbH > Loerracher Strasse 5a D79115 Freiburg From netmaster at space.net Fri Jun 2 16:26:02 2000 From: netmaster at space.net (Gert Doering, Netmaster) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:26:02 +0200 Subject: "ownership" on ancient network assignments? In-Reply-To: <22CF090CD80ED41189CE00E018C23A00E4D4@amonra.petrel.ch>; from pgl@petrel.net on Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 10:42:07AM +0200 References: <22CF090CD80ED41189CE00E018C23A00E4D4@amonra.petrel.ch> Message-ID: <20000602162602.B11768@Space.Net> Hi, On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 10:42:07AM +0200, Pascal Gloor wrote: > Or on of the two should perhaps ask for a new assignement ... > Any other suggestions ? That's what my suggestion would be: both should get a new assignment in the correct size... (neither will really need a /16). But they certainly wouldn't like this. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- SpaceNet GmbH Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 From jules at vas-net.net Tue Jun 6 13:40:55 2000 From: jules at vas-net.net (Jules Desforges) Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 12:40:55 +0100 Subject: Privacy issues with RIPE Database Message-ID: <393CE347.C782EAD4@vas-net.net> Hi, I would like to bring an issue to your attention, which has caused VAS-NET some commercial harm. VAS-NET have been a local registry for over 3 years now. VAS-NET are also an active member of RIPE, we usually send delegates to participate in RIPE meetings, and we make sure our staff are properly trained in RIPE procedures. We always endeavor to keep our entries in the RIPE database up to date. I'm now finding that our diligence in keeping the RIPE database up to date, is working in our detriment. We are finding that other companies who are in competition with us, are using the RIPE database as a tool to extract a list of our customer base and hence canvass our customers with marketing information. I do not wish to make allegations or name the parties involved, but we have witnessed this three times in the last 6 months. The Ripe Database is the only publicly accessible source which contains a list of our clients. I do not feel that these companies could have gleaned this information from any other source. The evidence is even more compelling when all of the mail shots have been sent to the admin contacts listed in the RIPE database. As a company, VAS-NET endorse RIPE's open policy concerning IP Registrations. In the past we've always had issues with other registries for not containing information which is important for peering decisions. (especially the American registries). I suppose the biggest problem, is finding a way of safeguarding our customers from being targeted in this way. A solution to this problem, doesn't seem likely with the way the RIPE NCC procedures are laid down at the moment. But, I would appreciate any input from yourselves regarding this matter. Best Regards, Jules Desforges VAS-NET From nigel.titley at level3.com Tue Jun 6 15:09:50 2000 From: nigel.titley at level3.com (Nigel Titley) Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:09:50 +0100 Subject: Privacy issues with RIPE Database In-Reply-To: Message from Jules Desforges of "Tue, 06 Jun 2000 12:40:55 BST." <393CE347.C782EAD4@vas-net.net> Message-ID: > We are finding that other companies who are in competition with > us, are using the RIPE database as a tool to extract a list > of our customer base and hence canvass our customers with marketing > information. I do not wish to make allegations or name the parties > involved, but we have witnessed this three times in the last 6 months. If you've got proof of this (or even reasonable suspicion) then inform the RIPE-NCC immediately. The information in the database is copyright and only to be used for operational purposes. The RIPE-NCC will follow this up with the member concerned. Nigel -- Tel: +44 171 864 4450 Fax: +44 171 864 4488 Well I'm disenchanted too. We're all disenchanted (James Thurber) (http://www.seanet.com/~thurber/disenchanted.gif) From matthew at planet.net.uk Tue Jun 13 11:19:45 2000 From: matthew at planet.net.uk (Matthew Robinson) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:19:45 +0100 Subject: Competition Time Message-ID: <6BF1C330AF53D311BE5D00508B09081001E3FED8@PLANET01> As announced at the RIPE meeting in Hungary we have decided to hold a small competition to design a new logo for the Test Traffic Project. This is for companies who are participating in the project to place on web sites, in brochures etc. We are also looking for a new name for the TT project when it becomes a pay service. The competition is split into two sections: 1. The logo 2. A new name for the TT project. There will be prizes. Winners will be decided by voting in the working group session. Entries should be submitted to me no later than the 1st of September. These will then be available on the web for viewing. Kind regards Matthew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From woeber at cc.univie.ac.at Tue Jun 13 14:39:55 2000 From: woeber at cc.univie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:39:55 +0200 Subject: Privacy issues with RIPE Database Message-ID: <009EB8CD.B4382230.16@cc.univie.ac.at> Dear Jules, >Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 12:40:55 +0100 >From: Jules Desforges >To: lir-wg at ripe.net >Subject: Privacy issues with RIPE Database > >Hi, > >I would like to bring an issue to your attention, >which has caused VAS-NET some commercial harm. > >VAS-NET have been a local registry for over 3 years now. >VAS-NET are also an active member of RIPE, we usually >send delegates to participate in RIPE meetings, and we >make sure our staff are properly trained in RIPE procedures. > >We always endeavor to keep our entries in the RIPE database >up to date. I'm now finding that our diligence in keeping >the RIPE database up to date, is working in our detriment. > >We are finding that other companies who are in competition with >us, are using the RIPE database as a tool to extract a list >of our customer base and hence canvass our customers with marketing >information. I do not wish to make allegations or name the parties ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >involved, but we have witnessed this three times in the last 6 months. ^^^^^^^^^ This is one of our problems, i.e. most people "hit" by others' non-conformance to rules or copyright shy away from following up. My feeling is that nothing is going to change for the better, unless we, as a community, and individual parties start to have those rules *enforced*. Doing so a couple of times and indeed going public with the action is going to change the "public perception" of the problem. >The Ripe Database is the only publicly accessible source which >contains a list of our clients. I do not feel that these companies >could have gleaned this information from any other source. The >evidence is even more compelling when all of the mail shots have been >sent to the admin contacts listed in the RIPE database. > >As a company, VAS-NET endorse RIPE's open policy concerning IP >Registrations. In the past we've always had issues with other registries >for not containing information which is important for peering decisions. >(especially the American registries). > >I suppose the biggest problem, is finding a way of safeguarding our >customers from being targeted in this way. A solution to this problem, >doesn't seem likely with the way the RIPE NCC procedures are laid down >at the moment. But, I would appreciate any input from yourselves >regarding this matter. > >Best Regards, > >Jules Desforges >VAS-NET > Best regards, Wilfried. _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From nurani at ripe.net Fri Jun 16 14:33:54 2000 From: nurani at ripe.net (Nurani Nimpuno) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:33:54 +0200 Subject: Registration Services status update Message-ID: <200006161233.OAA28444@x7.ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, As reported at the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest, the RIPE NCC has been going through a difficult period with an ever increasing workload over the last year. As a direct result of this the response time for IP Address requests has increased to longer than what is normally considered acceptable. At RIPE 36 the RIPE NCC reported several short, medium and long-term actions in order to improve the Registration Services. Increasing the resources in the Registration Services, improving efficiency, further automation of processes, increasing the level of expertise and strengthening staff's technical awareness are concrete examples of actions we reported to initiate on both a short and long-term basis. As a short term measure we temporarily increased the staffing level in the Registration Services dramatically by utilising resources drawn throughout the organisation. It was clear that this action had a positive effect on the wait queue which rapidly decreased to a couple of days. As you may have noticed the wait queue has again increased over the last couple of weeks. We are in the process applying the actions mentioned above and are also hiring new staff to cope with the considerable workload. However, it will take quite some time before the new hostmasters are trained and working efficiently. In addition to hiring new staff we are continuing to use the resources in the organisation in a more flexible and efficient manner. We have also asked our colleagues at APNIC for additional resources that they have very kindly agreed to provide. The RIPE NCC will thus have two APNIC hostmasters for a short period this summer who will contribute to the processing of IP Address requests. This will help reduce the current workload while we continue to realise our long-term improvement goals. I intend to further discuss these goals with the May 17 Task Force set up at RIPE 36 and look forward to any input they may have! Please rest assured that we are doing our utmost to reduce the current wait queue and that we are determined to improve the quality of service in the Registration Services. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From nurani at ripe.net Fri Jun 16 14:44:31 2000 From: nurani at ripe.net (Nurani Nimpuno) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:44:31 +0200 Subject: (Message resent) Registration Services status update Message-ID: <200006161244.OAA28560@x7.ripe.net> * Apologies for the formatting of previous message. Dear Colleagues, As reported at the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest, the RIPE NCC has been going through a difficult period with an ever increasing workload over the last year. As a direct result of this the response time for IP Address requests has increased to longer than what is normally considered acceptable. At RIPE 36 the RIPE NCC reported several short, medium and long-term actions in order to improve the Registration Services. Increasing the resources in the Registration Services, improving efficiency, further automation of processes, increasing the level of expertise and strengthening staff's technical awareness are concrete examples of actions we reported to initiate on both a short and long-term basis. As a short term measure we temporarily increased the staffing level in the Registration Services dramatically by utilising resources drawn throughout the organisation. It was clear that this action had a positive effect on the wait queue which rapidly decreased to a couple of days. As you may have noticed the wait queue has again increased over the last couple of weeks. We are in the process applying the actions mentioned above and are also hiring new staff to cope with the considerable workload. However, it will take quite some time before the new hostmasters are trained and working efficiently. In addition to hiring new staff we are continuing to use the resources in the organisation in a more flexible and efficient manner. We have also asked our colleagues at APNIC for additional resources that they have very kindly agreed to provide. The RIPE NCC will thus have two APNIC hostmasters for a short period this summer who will contribute to the processing of IP Address requests. This will help reduce the current workload while we continue to realise our long-term improvement goals. I intend to further discuss these goals with the May 17 Task Force set up at RIPE 36 and look forward to any input they may have. Please rest assured that we are doing our utmost to reduce the current wait queue and that we are determined to improve the quality of service in the Registration Services. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From joao at ripe.net Tue Jun 20 14:27:36 2000 From: joao at ripe.net (Joao Luis Silva Damas) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:27:36 +0200 Subject: RIPE NCC CIDR blocks - smallest allocations Message-ID: During the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest there was a request to publish the list of CIDR blocks allocated by the RIPE NCC and the smallest allocation issued from each of them. This is it. 62/8: /19 193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 212/8: /19 213/8: /19 217/8: /20 If this is what people are looking for, we will add it to our ftp/website as a permanent resource. regards, Joao Damas Head of External Services RIPE NCC From joao at ripe.net Tue Jun 20 14:26:19 2000 From: joao at ripe.net (Joao Luis Silva Damas) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:26:19 +0200 Subject: RIPE NCC ADDRESS POLICY CHANGES Message-ID: *** CHANGES IN RIPE NCC ADDRESS POLICY *** During the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest (16-19 May 2000) the LIR working group agreed that the RIPE NCC will: - lower the minimum allocation from a /19 to a /20. - this change will take effect starting August 1 Allocations of this size will initially be issued from CIDR block 217/8. Minimum allocations do not constrain requests for address space that can justify bigger blocks of addresses. ** If you use prefix based filtering in your routers, please note this change ** regards, Joao Damas Head of External Services RIPE NCC From joao at ripe.net Tue Jun 20 14:43:55 2000 From: joao at ripe.net (Joao Luis Silva Damas) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:43:55 +0200 Subject: RIPE NCC CIDR blocks - smallest allocations Message-ID: Ehem... Who said copy and paste was something useful... At 14:27 +0200 20/6/00, Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote: >During the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest there was a request to >publish the list of CIDR blocks allocated by the RIPE NCC and the >smallest allocation issued from each of them. > >This is it. > >62/8: /19 >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments the last 2 should read 194/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 195/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments >212/8: /19 >213/8: /19 >217/8: /20 > >If this is what people are looking for, we will add it to our >ftp/website as a permanent resource. > >regards, > >Joao Damas >Head of External Services >RIPE NCC Joao From ck at toplink.net Wed Jun 21 12:04:32 2000 From: ck at toplink.net (Christian Kratzer) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:04:32 +0200 (CEST) Subject: RIPE NCC CIDR blocks - smallest allocations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, [snipp] > >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments > >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments > >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments > > the last 2 should read > > 194/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments > 195/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments ??? Are there really /29 PI assignments. I would believe most isp's allow a maximum a prefix length of /24 even in the 192/8 swap. [snipp] > >If this is what people are looking for, we will add it to our > >ftp/website as a permanent resource. please do document this on your website. Greetings Christian -- TopLink Internet Services GmbH ck at 171.2.195.in-addr.arpa Christian Kratzer http://www.toplink.net/ Phone: +49 7032 2701-0 Fax: +49 7032 2701-19 FreeBSD spoken here! From adrian.pauling at bt.com Mon Jun 26 18:27:07 2000 From: adrian.pauling at bt.com (adrian.pauling at bt.com) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:27:07 +0100 Subject: PGP 5 CERT Advisory Message-ID: <27EDC2145E42D211AD9600606DD5EC1D03BD3207@mbrpb1nt02.mww.bt.com> Are RIPE Community aware of the CERT Advisory regarding PGP version 5 for UNIX? http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-09.html Regards, Adrian F Pauling :-)NEL2C Internet Protocol Manager acd Information Systems Engineering Technical Architecture AFP1-RIPE / AFP-ARIN / AFP25-InterNIC * adrian.pauling at bt.com * +44 19 2685 1992 / +44 78 0290 4877 British Telecommunications plc Registered Office 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ Registered in England no 1800000 From woeber at cc.univie.ac.at Tue Jun 27 11:28:12 2000 From: woeber at cc.univie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:28:12 +0200 Subject: PGP 5 CERT Advisory Message-ID: <009EC3B3.3DEB29B0.7@cc.univie.ac.at> Adrian, actually an alert was already circulated by the RIPE NCC on Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:32:58 +0200. But you do have a point in that the warning was only sent to the DB-WG list. Touching on Alessandro's point, I'd be *really* interested to find out about the "hit-rate" in our community. I.e. how many of us (if anyone at all) were satisfying the criteria to end up with a potentially vulnerable key! Wilfried. PS: on the GnuPG pages, there is interesting information wrt the randomness issue ( http://www.gnupg.org/download.html --> see EGD ) _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From ripe-dbm at ripe.net Tue Jun 27 11:33:43 2000 From: ripe-dbm at ripe.net (RIPE Database Administration) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:33:43 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domains Message-ID: <200006270933.LAA13617@birch.ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. Please note that you may experience some delays in processing your updates on June 28-29. We are sorry about any inconvenience this may cause. If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to contact . We are sorry about any inconvenience this may cause. Regards, Engin Gunduz ____________________________ RIPE Database Administration. From mike.norris at heanet.ie Tue Jun 27 16:21:23 2000 From: mike.norris at heanet.ie (mike.norris at heanet.ie) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 15:21:23 +0100 Subject: Deletion of German domains In-Reply-To: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F00609783612939941D@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE190@nt-server.heanet.ie> > According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan Has this agreement been published? > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. While speed and efficiency are to be commended, this is rather short notice, isn't it? From the mail on 8th June, I understood that DENIC would need between one and two months after moving the domain objects before the associated person objects could be moved. Regards. Mike From andrei at ripe.net Tue Jun 27 17:29:08 2000 From: andrei at ripe.net (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 17:29:08 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domains References: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE190@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <3958C844.689229D9@ripe.net> mike.norris at heanet.ie wrote: > > > According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > > Has this agreement been published? > No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It is based on the community consensus that domain related information (excluding reverse delegations) should be moved from the RIPE Database to the respective ccTLD databases. The RIPE Database will still be the source for domain related information using referral mechanism (as long as top level domain objects point to the actual domain databases). Though it may be more efficient to query these databases directly. > > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. > > While speed and efficiency are to be commended, this is rather short > notice, isn't it? From the mail on 8th June, I understood that DENIC > would need between one and two months after moving the domain objects > before the associated person objects could be moved. > You are right, we are moving only domain objects. The person objects will remain in the RIPE Database for several months. > Regards. > > Mike Regards, Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC From bauer at denic.de Tue Jun 27 12:26:57 2000 From: bauer at denic.de (=?iso-8859-2?q?J=F6rg_Bauer=2FDenic?=) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:26:57 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Deletion of German domains Message-ID: On 27.06.00 11:33 RIPE Database Administration wrote: > > > Dear Colleagues, > > According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. nearly correct ;-) The server name is whois.denic.de -- ----------------------------------+------------------------------------------- Joerg Bauer | eMail : Joerg.Bauer at denic.de DENIC eG | Fon : +49 69 272 35 180 Wiesenhuettenplatz 26 | Fax : +49 69 27235 235 D-60329 Frankfurt | ----------------------------------+------------------------------------------- From mike.norris at heanet.ie Tue Jun 27 17:51:23 2000 From: mike.norris at heanet.ie (mike.norris at heanet.ie) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 16:51:23 +0100 Subject: Deletion of German domains In-Reply-To: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293E1AD1@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19A@nt-server.heanet.ie> > > > According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > > > > Has this agreement been published? > > > No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It is based on > the community consensus that domain related information (excluding > reverse delegations) should be moved from the RIPE Database to the > respective ccTLD databases. Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. Was this consensus achieved at RIPE 36 and we're still waiting for the relevant minutes? It would be useful to have some reference document, even a draft, but this is **no reflection whatsoever** on the excellent work of RIPE and its working groups! > > The RIPE Database will still be the source for domain related > information using referral mechanism (as long as top level domain > objects point to the actual domain databases). Though it may be more > efficient to query these databases directly. > > > > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > > > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > > > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. > > > > While speed and efficiency are to be commended, this is rather short > > notice, isn't it? From the mail on 8th June, I understood that DENIC > > would need between one and two months after moving the domain objects > > before the associated person objects could be moved. > > > > You are right, we are moving only domain objects. The person objects > will remain in the RIPE Database for several months. What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate whois server? Regards. Mike From Alessandro.Pelosi at swisscom-italy.com Tue Jun 27 18:01:10 2000 From: Alessandro.Pelosi at swisscom-italy.com (Alessandro.Pelosi at swisscom-italy.com) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 18:01:10 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domains....:-| Message-ID: Hallo: Excuse the fact that I take part to the discussion from a little time, i have previously looked at the old material present at the ripe website, but I have another question to ask to you: Dou we all plan to move all the record of the european domains to the database of the local domain registry aor is this only a single case? Are there any work in progres with IT-NIC that still has its own database? Thanks Alessandro Pelosi Network Engineering Swisscom Italy From Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no Wed Jun 28 00:05:22 2000 From: Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no (Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 00:05:22 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domains In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Jun 2000 16:51:23 +0100" <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19A@nt-server.heanet.ie> References: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19A@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <20000628000522Z.he@runit.sintef.no> > > No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It > > is based on the community consensus that domain related > > information (excluding reverse delegations) should be moved > > from the RIPE Database to the respective ccTLD databases. > > Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. Was > this consensus achieved at RIPE 36 and we're still waiting for > the relevant minutes? Frankly, I don't see what the great fuss is about, Mike. I think this has been discussed in the CENTR arena, and if I'm not mistaken there's been developed a consensus between the RIPE NCC and the CENTR folks for the preferred way forward. The RIPE DB's primary purpose isn't to serve as a repository for domain objects and related person objects -- I have for a long time had the impression that this has been rather obvious, and that a better solution for all parties would be preferable (less work for the CC registries to maintain the RIPE DB data, tighter coupling to the underlying registry database, costs for running the system where they can be accounted for, etc. etc.) Since the data published is in some sense being published by the relevant CC registry, they're free to do as they see fit with the data, including moving it to a separate whois server. That's as a matter of fact what has happened to the .NO domain objects -- the deletion happened shortly after the last RIPE meeting (we still have a little cleanup left to do). The .NO registry started using its own registry database late last year, and after that time, the .NO domain objects had not been maintained in the RIPE database. Thus, in order to not continue publishing increasingly stale data, it was seen as better to remove the objects from the RIPE database, and instead insert a pointer to the .NO registry's own whois database. No, this wasn't published to the RIPE lists, but instead published to those who have dealt directly with the .NO CC registry previously. > > You are right, we are moving only domain objects. The person > > objects will remain in the RIPE Database for several months. > > What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query > about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate > whois server? With the reservation that we're talking about the same thing, that works quite nicely as is for the domain objects. It will however by default only trigger if the corresponding domain object does not exist in the RIPE database, thus the push to remove the stale data, so that the otherwise-masked but maintained objects could become visible. As for the person objects referred by the deleted .NO objects, we just went ahead and (tried to) delete the referred person objects, and the RIPE database reference integrity check made sure that we didn't actually remove objects which were referenced from other remaining objects in the database. If the RIPE database doesn't have as primary purpose to serve as a domain name registry database, it certainly didn't have as its primary purpose to serve as a phone book (serving otherwise-orphaned person objects). Best regards, - H?vard From mike.norris at heanet.ie Wed Jun 28 08:52:06 2000 From: mike.norris at heanet.ie (mike.norris at heanet.ie) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 07:52:06 +0100 Subject: Deletion of German domains In-Reply-To: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293E1AEF@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19B@nt-server.heanet.ie> > >>>> According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > >>> Has this agreement been published? > >> No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It is based on > >> the community consensus that domain related information (excluding > >> reverse delegations) should be moved from the RIPE Database to the > >> respective ccTLD databases. > > Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. > > i am confused here. i presume the communities involved, ripe ncc and denic, > reached a consensus and one or the other would be whining if not. why > should this be a concern of the other lirs or the wg or you or me? See Andrei's reply, which points to a decision at RIPE 35 of the db-wg. So the WG has an interest, else RIPE NCC wouldn't have sent it the announcement about today's change in the first place. All I wanted was a reference to the original decision. Regards. Mike From mike.norris at heanet.ie Wed Jun 28 09:19:58 2000 From: mike.norris at heanet.ie (mike.norris at heanet.ie) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 08:19:58 +0100 Subject: Deletion of German domains In-Reply-To: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293E1B10@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19C@nt-server.heanet.ie> > > > No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It > > > is based on the community consensus that domain related > > > information (excluding reverse delegations) should be moved > > > from the RIPE Database to the respective ccTLD databases. > > > > Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. Was > > this consensus achieved at RIPE 36 and we're still waiting for > > the relevant minutes? > > Frankly, I don't see what the great fuss is about, Mike. No great fuss, H?vard, just a request for a reminder of the original action point leading to this operational change. Andrei has now provided this. > > I think this has been discussed in the CENTR arena, and if I'm > not mistaken there's been developed a consensus between the RIPE > NCC and the CENTR folks for the preferred way forward. The RIPE > DB's primary purpose isn't to serve as a repository for domain > objects and related person objects -- I have for a long time had > the impression that this has been rather obvious, and that a > better solution for all parties would be preferable (less work > for the CC registries to maintain the RIPE DB data, tighter > coupling to the underlying registry database, costs for running > the system where they can be accounted for, etc. etc.) Indeed, and this has been raised in the db-wg many times in the past, even in pre-CENTR days. It would make sense if other CC registries could adopt the practice of .nl, .no, .de etc when it comes to providing a database of their registered domains and ancillary data. Regards. Mike From stephenb at uk.uu.net Wed Jun 28 11:23:23 2000 From: stephenb at uk.uu.net (Stephen Burley) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 09:23:23 +0000 Subject: Deletion of German domains References: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19C@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <3959C40A.FFFAAB1D@uk.uu.net> Hi Since i started this move to get the top level country domains removed from the RIPE DB i would just like to clarify the process that was used to get to the announcement the other day. RIPE 33 was the first time this issue was raised the minute i found for does not reflect the discussion that was entered into correctly: Regarding input from the other working groups. We have started to think about issues such as: where do we store data and who is responsible for the maintenance of data and who might be in the position for providing branding/rubber stamping/certificates for certain data. In particular DNS objects as being the majority of objects. Wilfried stated that we really have to start thinking about how to deal with that. RIPE 34 Operational difficulties around domain objects. Need decision on migration of domain objects -- CENTR to respond urgently. Specification input deferred until migration path decided. RIPE 35 This was minuted but not detailed it was discussed but i seem to remember the ASO thing taking hte limelight. 6. Report from the address council 7. The policy making process 8. Establish final selection procedure for the address council 9. Domain objects in the database 10. AOB RIPE 36 No minutes published yet but i do remember de.nic telling us that they would be ready to move the domains by a certain day which i can not remember. During the DB working group i suggested that a time limit to move the rest of the nic objects out be introduced and concensus was agreed that when we migrate to RPSL DB these domains would no longer be supported. I do not know if this will help i just though a brief history might help show just how long this has been in discussion and help in some way to stop this what seems to be trivial discussions over something that is not really a problem. Hope this helps Regards Stephen Burley UUNET EMEA Hostmaster From randy at psg.com Tue Jun 27 18:48:53 2000 From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 09:48:53 -0700 Subject: Deletion of German domains References: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293E1AD1@nt-server.heanet.ie> <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19A@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: >>>> According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan >>> Has this agreement been published? >> No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It is based on >> the community consensus that domain related information (excluding >> reverse delegations) should be moved from the RIPE Database to the >> respective ccTLD databases. > Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. i am confused here. i presume the communities involved, ripe ncc and denic, reached a consensus and one or the other would be whining if not. why should this be a concern of the other lirs or the wg or you or me? > What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query > about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate > whois server? is this not just for domain:s? randy From andrei at ripe.net Wed Jun 28 18:13:49 2000 From: andrei at ripe.net (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 18:13:49 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domains References: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19A@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: <395A243D.99A33938@ripe.net> Simon Leinen wrote: > > >>>>> "mn" == mike norris writes: > > What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query > > about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate > > whois server? > > Such a mechanism has been in place for a while. The domains under .ch > have been using it since December 1998. > > $ whois -h whois.ripe.net '-r -R -T domain ch' > [...] > domain: ch > [...] > refer: SIMPLE whois.nic.ch > changed: gottsponer at switch.ch 19981223 > > In the meantime there has been an improved version of the referral > mechanism which provides the IP address (or hostname?) of the original > requestor to the delegated Whois server, which can be useful for > logging/rate limiting purposes. It's certainly documented somewhere > on the RIPE Web server. This feature was introduced in 2.3.2 software release. Please find below the extract from the Release Notes: NEW FEATURES - New type of referral: CLIENTADDRESS o A fourth kind of referral is defined, CLIENTADDRESS (The other three were RIPE, INTERNIC and SIMPLE). o The IP address of the client is sent to the referred whois server, if the referral type is CLIENTADDRESS. o The IP address is sent using the -V flag. The version and the IP address will be separated by a comma (eg, -Vripe2.3.1,193.140.45.45). o No other flag will be forwarded to the referred whois server. o When the server gets such a request, it checks the IP number of the server which does the referral against a list of authorized whois servers. If it is not in the list, it will be rejected. The list is named AUTHORIZEDFORREFERRAL in the configuration. o Then, the IP address of the client is extracted from the -V flag string and it will be regarded as if it is the IP address of a directly querying whois client (ie, it is checked against the list of DENYWHOISACCESS list). Regards, Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC From hostmaster at demdwu24.mediaways.net Wed Jun 28 17:08:37 2000 From: hostmaster at demdwu24.mediaways.net (mediaWays Hostmaster) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:08:37 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domain objects Message-ID: <20000628150837.19969.qmail@demdwu24.mediaways.net> Hi, Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has only a reference to an german domain object mark as "NEVER_REFD" now? Kind regards, _____________________________ Stephan Mankopf +49 5241 80 88729 stephan.mankopf at mediaways.net From simon at limmat.switch.ch Wed Jun 28 18:03:18 2000 From: simon at limmat.switch.ch (Simon Leinen) Date: 28 Jun 2000 18:03:18 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domains In-Reply-To: mike.norris@heanet.ie's message of "Tue, 27 Jun 2000 16:51:23 +0100" References: <3F2D1A940FB8D1118A1F0060978361293CE19A@nt-server.heanet.ie> Message-ID: >>>>> "mn" == mike norris writes: > What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query > about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate > whois server? Such a mechanism has been in place for a while. The domains under .ch have been using it since December 1998. $ whois -h whois.ripe.net '-r -R -T domain ch' [...] domain: ch [...] refer: SIMPLE whois.nic.ch changed: gottsponer at switch.ch 19981223 In the meantime there has been an improved version of the referral mechanism which provides the IP address (or hostname?) of the original requestor to the delegated Whois server, which can be useful for logging/rate limiting purposes. It's certainly documented somewhere on the RIPE Web server. -- Simon Leinen simon at babar.switch.ch SWITCH http://www.switch.ch/misc/leinen/ Who is General Failure & why's he reading my disk? From engin at ripe.net Thu Jun 29 10:21:34 2000 From: engin at ripe.net (Engin Gunduz) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:21:34 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of German domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000628150837.19969.qmail@demdwu24.mediaways.net> Message-ID: Hi Stephan, On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, mediaWays Hostmaster wrote: > Hi, > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > "NEVER_REFD" now? Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change anything in the consistency project regarding to .de domain deletions. Even we did change something, since person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, our changes would be void. Regards, Engin Gunduz RIPE NCC Database Group > > Kind regards, > _____________________________ > Stephan Mankopf > +49 5241 80 88729 > stephan.mankopf at mediaways.net From Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no Thu Jun 29 12:40:27 2000 From: Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no (Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:40:27 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domain objects In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:21:34 +0200 (CEST)" References: Message-ID: <20000629124027S.he@runit.sintef.no> > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > > "NEVER_REFD" now? > > Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change > anything in the consistency project regarding to .de > domain deletions. Even we did change something, since > person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple > of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, > our changes would be void. I'm sorry, but I have a hard time comprehending the above. I have one brief question which may serve to clarify this issue: Is there a good reason to keep person objects in the RIPE database when they are no longer referenced by any other object in the database? I would have thought that the answer to that would be a resounding "no", so I am a little more than puzzled by the above conversation. - H?vard From ripe-dbm at ripe.net Thu Jun 29 12:45:13 2000 From: ripe-dbm at ripe.net (RIPE Database Administration) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:45:13 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: <200006291045.MAA05752@birch.ripe.net> -------- Dear Colleauges, We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central European Summer Time. If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. -- Filippo Portera From engin at ripe.net Thu Jun 29 12:59:09 2000 From: engin at ripe.net (Engin Gunduz) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:59:09 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of German domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000629124027S.he@runit.sintef.no> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no wrote: > > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > > > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > > > "NEVER_REFD" now? > > > > Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change > > anything in the consistency project regarding to .de > > domain deletions. Even we did change something, since > > person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple > > of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, > > our changes would be void. > > I'm sorry, but I have a hard time comprehending the above. > > I have one brief question which may serve to clarify this issue: > Is there a good reason to keep person objects in the RIPE > database when they are no longer referenced by any other object > in the database? I would have thought that the answer to that > would be a resounding "no", so I am a little more than puzzled by > the above conversation. Hi Havard, Since DENIC do not have a person/role database yet, we have migrated only domain objects for now. After the implementation of DENIC's person/role database, which DENIC expect to take a couple of months from now on, we will also migrate the related person/role objects to DENIC's db. Until then, we will continue to keep .de domain related person/role objects in RIPE whois database. They will also continue to create new person/role objects in our db. This may sound strange, but it is the optimal solution we could find, thinking that more than 3 million objects are involved in the migration process. We weren't able to do this in a single shut. I hope it is clear now. Best regards, Engin Gunduz RIPE NCC Database Group > > > - H?vard > From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Thu Jun 29 13:23:11 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:23:11 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hi, I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles had also "DENIC" as source. But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE RIPE Database Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net n cc: Sent by: owner-lir-wg@ ripe.net 29.06.00 12:45 -------- Dear Colleauges, We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central European Summer Time. If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. -- Filippo Portera From ths at salink.net Thu Jun 29 14:38:12 2000 From: ths at salink.net (Thorsten Schreiner) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:38:12 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: Message-ID: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > had also "DENIC" as source. > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? Hi, another nice thing: We just got an error message, saying that DENIC tried to CHANGE a RIPE-HANDLE we protected by "mnt-by"... btw: whois.nic.de doesn't respond to whois-queries at the moment :-) I think they want to become a BIG player... but actually can't right now. Bye, Thorsten -- mailto:ths at salink.net | Thorsten Schreiner http://www.salink.net | SaLink Netzwerkgesellschaft mbH tel: +49 681 93 47 51 | Im Stadtwald, Geb. 30 fax: +49 681 93 47 55 | 66123 Saarbruecken From registry at she.net Thu Jun 29 14:56:36 2000 From: registry at she.net (Ralf Naegele) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:56:36 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: And where are the mnt-by objects? Ralf On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, henning.brauer at bsmail.de shaped the electrons to say: > Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:23:11 +0200 > From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > To: lir-wg at ripe.net, db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > Subject: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > Hi, > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > had also "DENIC" as source. > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > NOC54-RIPE. > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > RIPE Database > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > n cc: > e.net> > Sent by: > owner-lir-wg@ > ripe.net > > > 29.06.00 > 12:45 > > > > > > > > -------- > Dear Colleauges, > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > European Summer Time. > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > -- > Filippo Portera > > > > > ------------ ein Unternehmen der SHE Informationstechnologie AG ----------- Ralf Naegele _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ SHE Kommunikations-Systeme GmbH _/ _/ _/ _/ Phon: +49 621 52 00 0 Donnersbergweg 3 _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ Fax: +49 621 52 00 551 D-67059 Ludwigshafen _/ _/ _/ _/ Mail: ralf.naegele at she.net Xlink-PoP LU/MA/HD/KL/DA _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ http://www.she.net/ -------------------------- Security is our business ----------------------- No HTML or WORD in Mails. HTML is for WEB, Word is for Micro$oft. From kju at fqdn.org Thu Jun 29 15:44:54 2000 From: kju at fqdn.org (Michael Holzt) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:44:54 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net>; from ths@salink.net on Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 02:38:12PM +0200 References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> Message-ID: <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> 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. 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 From marcus at netplace.de Thu Jun 29 16:20:37 2000 From: marcus at netplace.de (Marcus Rist) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 16:20:37 +0200 Subject: Deletion of German domain objects In-Reply-To: ; from engin@ripe.net on Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 10:21:34AM +0200 References: <20000628150837.19969.qmail@demdwu24.mediaways.net> Message-ID: <20000629162037.A10716@snickers.netplace.de> Hi, Engin Gunduz wrote To mediaWays Hostmaster: > On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, mediaWays Hostmaster wrote: > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > > "NEVER_REFD" now? > > Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change > anything in the consistency project regarding to .de > domain deletions. Even we did change something, since > person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple > of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, > our changes would be void. Just to be sure and because we've discused it over here heavily: RIPE will not delete any person object in the RIPE database that is marked as NEVER_REFD but protected by any kind of maintainer, right? best regards -Marcus -- Marcus Rist email: marcus at netplace.de netplace Telematic GmbH fon: +49 89 551805-23 http://www.netplace.de/ fax: +49 89 551805-24 From tk at webmatic.de Thu Jun 29 16:49:59 2000 From: tk at webmatic.de (Thomas Krause) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 16:49:59 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> Message-ID: <395B6217.C07409EB@webmatic.de> Hi, must be a really stupid conversion procedure ... A large part here in east germany has a leading zero at the ZIP-Code - nice that these zeros where removed ... role: Hostmaster Webmatic address: Webmatic Kommunikations GmbH address: Weissenfelser Str. 46a address: 6217 Merseburg address: DE e-mail: hostmaster at webmatic.de nic-hdl: WMT1-RIPE changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 20000321 source: DENIC Regards, Thomas. Thorsten Schreiner wrote: > > henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > Hi, > > another nice thing: We just got an error message, saying that > DENIC tried to CHANGE a RIPE-HANDLE we protected by "mnt-by"... > > btw: whois.nic.de doesn't respond to whois-queries at the moment :-) > > I think they want to become a BIG player... but actually can't right > now. > > Bye, Thorsten > > -- > mailto:ths at salink.net | Thorsten Schreiner > http://www.salink.net | SaLink Netzwerkgesellschaft mbH > tel: +49 681 93 47 51 | Im Stadtwald, Geb. 30 > fax: +49 681 93 47 55 | 66123 Saarbruecken -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Thomas Krause Webmatic Kommunikations GmbH Tel: +49 3461 336630 ------------------------------------------------------------ From stephenb at uk.uu.net Thu Jun 29 18:26:03 2000 From: stephenb at uk.uu.net (Stephen Burley) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 16:26:03 +0000 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> Message-ID: <395B789B.FFC45956@uk.uu.net> 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 From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Thu Jun 29 19:49:16 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 19:49:16 +0200 Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr sehr gerne. Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an die Bearbeitungszeiten denke... Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von uns haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten und Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich unverantwortlich. Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r whois macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder alle, zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist eine bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige Arbeitsweise des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. Bei den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r uns nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder deren Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich alle ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins Land, und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. Folge also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. Gruss Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE "NCC Network Coordination To: Center" cc: 29.06.00 18:04 Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au weia. In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. MfG Martin Ahrens Mediascape Hostmasters -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 An: NCC Network Coordination Center Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Kann ich nur hoffen. Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer Kram. Gruss Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE "NCC Network Coordination To: Center" cc: 29.06.00 16:00 Hallo, was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der ?bernahme? MfG Martin Ahrens Mediascape Hostmasters -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im Auftrag von henning.brauer at bsmail.de Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects Hi, I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles had also "DENIC" as source. But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE RIPE Database Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net n cc: Sent by: owner-lir-wg@ ripe.net 29.06.00 12:45 -------- Dear Colleauges, We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central European Summer Time. If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. -- Filippo Portera From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Fri Jun 30 09:39:12 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 09:39:12 +0200 Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hi, I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... once again in english: I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think on the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no domain or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us could live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be a good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the role:s) admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) is described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info is now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german domain! The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the domain and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that even no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for us! It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is not against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me back a few years, please. Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC or resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop our tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! This can not be the way to our future. Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your DENIC reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs board... Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE Robert Martin-Leg?ne To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Sent by: r at jenslyn.nisse .dk 30.06.00 05:49 Hallo. This is a list in English. What did you write? On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr sehr > gerne. > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an die > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von uns > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten und > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich unverantwortlich. > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r whois > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder alle, > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist eine > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige Arbeitsweise > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. Bei > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r uns > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder deren > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich alle > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins Land, > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. Folge > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > Gruss > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "NCC Network > Coordination To: > Center" cc: > pe.de> > > 29.06.00 > 18:04 > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au weia. > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > MfG > Martin Ahrens > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer Kram. > > Gruss > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "NCC Network > Coordination To: > Center" cc: > domain objects > pe.de> > > 29.06.00 > 16:00 > > > > > > > Hallo, > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > ?bernahme? > > MfG > Martin Ahrens > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im Auftrag > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > Hi, > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > had also "DENIC" as source. > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > NOC54-RIPE. > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > RIPE Database > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > n cc: > domain > objects > e.net> > Sent by: > owner-lir-wg@ > ripe.net > > > 29.06.00 > 12:45 > > > > > > > > -------- > Dear Colleauges, > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > European Summer Time. > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > -- > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > -- Robert Martin-Legene From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Fri Jun 30 10:57:48 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 10:57:48 +0200 Subject: petition against DENIC's plans Message-ID: Hi all, I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de I just copied my mails regarding this, so if there is anybody out to rewrite the text... please send them to hostmaster at bsws.de. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE From engin at ripe.net Thu Jun 29 17:13:09 2000 From: engin at ripe.net (Engin Gunduz) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:13:09 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of German domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000629162037.A10716@snickers.netplace.de> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Marcus Rist wrote: > Hi, > > Engin Gunduz wrote To mediaWays Hostmaster: > > On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, mediaWays Hostmaster wrote: > > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > > > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > > > "NEVER_REFD" now? > > > > Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change > > anything in the consistency project regarding to .de > > domain deletions. Even we did change something, since > > person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple > > of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, > > our changes would be void. > > Just to be sure and because we've discused it over here heavily: > > RIPE will not delete any person object in the RIPE database that is > marked as NEVER_REFD but protected by any kind of maintainer, right? Dear Marcus, According to the current policy, RIPE NCC cannot delete anything from the RIPE database without the consent of data owners. Regards, Engin Gunduz RIPE NCC Database Group > > best regards > -Marcus > > -- > Marcus Rist > email: marcus at netplace.de > netplace Telematic GmbH fon: +49 89 551805-23 > http://www.netplace.de/ fax: +49 89 551805-24 > From randy at psg.com Thu Jun 29 16:59:15 2000 From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:59:15 -0700 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> Message-ID: > I cannot understand why the DENIC doesn't help funding with one central > ripe database instead of setting up a own system. distribution/decentralization is the key to scaling on the internet. and the internet is all about scaling. of course, we have to make the technology scalable. hence the discussion about referral etc. randy From lists at fips.de Thu Jun 29 17:11:53 2000 From: lists at fips.de (Philipp Buehler) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:11:53 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <395B6217.C07409EB@webmatic.de>; "Thomas Krause" on 29.06.2000 @ 16:49:59 METDST References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> <395B6217.C07409EB@webmatic.de> Message-ID: <20000629171152.A20243@pohl.fips.de> Thomas Krause wrote To Thorsten Schreiner: > must be a really stupid conversion procedure ... A large part here in > east germany has a leading zero at the ZIP-Code - nice that > these zeros where removed ... I just count all errors made and cannot do anything more than shaking my head. This is absolutely professional. NOT! What about this `test at nowhere.denic.de' changed lines anywhere too? ciao -- Philipp Buehler, aka fIpS | sysfive.com GmbH | BOfH | NUCH | %SYSTEM-F-TOOEARLY, please contact your sysadmin at a sensible time. Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity. From s.willing at mops.net Thu Jun 29 17:40:03 2000 From: s.willing at mops.net (Sebastian Willing) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:40:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> from Michael Holzt at "Jun 29, 0 03:44:54 pm" Message-ID: <200006291540.RAA06682@mara.mops.net> Hello! > 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. The RIPE didn't want to serve the .de-namespace for free any longer and it seems that the DeNic didn't want to pay for the services. I agree that the better solution would have been to pay the RIPE for service. > > 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 what if a handle is deleted from one DB but not from the other? Once the handle # is re-assigned, the owner of a domain depends on the server you ask. I think, the best thing is to restore the deleted records from RIPE backups and to remove the referer to the DeNic-whois-server until either the DeNic is paying or is running a workable service (maybe with references to the RIPE-whois-server for persons). Yours, S.Willing From ths at salink.net Thu Jun 29 17:11:33 2000 From: ths at salink.net (Thorsten Schreiner) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:11:33 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> Message-ID: <395B6725.258E32EF@salink.net> 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 > ... > Why has this mess had to happen? In my opinion, because DENIC wants to prevent smaller ISPs to work efficiently. It might be a good idea to administer ".de" Domains at nic.de but why do we have to set up new NIC-handles ??? Are the RIPE-handles now useless ??? Regards, Thorsten -- mailto:ths at salink.net | Thorsten Schreiner http://www.salink.net | SaLink Netzwerkgesellschaft mbH tel: +49 681 93 47 51 | Im Stadtwald, Geb. 30 fax: +49 681 93 47 55 | 66123 Saarbruecken From kju at fqdn.org Thu Jun 29 18:58:47 2000 From: kju at fqdn.org (Michael Holzt) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:58:47 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <395B789B.FFC45956@uk.uu.net>; from stephenb@uk.uu.net on Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 04:26:03PM +0000 References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> <395B789B.FFC45956@uk.uu.net> Message-ID: <20000629185847.A263@fqdn.org> On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 04:26:03PM +0000, Stephen Burley wrote: > That ones easy, it should never have been used for this info RIPE is the > rIPe repository not the domains authority. Perhaps it wasn't designed for this usage, but it was clearly the best system we ever had for domain registry. You could use the same person handles for a number of top level domains which reduced the work in a great way. Now we will have to cope with different person handles for every registry, with complicated update procedures and so on. The wiser solution would be, if the registries would have agreed on supporting the central ripe database by funding and services. I don't see how the costs can be lower for several independent registries than for one community-payed-for central registry. If you want to see what can happen when all this information disappears from ripe and will be moved to other registries, just take the DeNIC (or the CORE) as an example. For both registries i don't know how to update my handles or can do it only by asking an official registrar / member. This fragmentation of registries will only lead to unreliable and outdated informations in the databases. > The only domains that are in there are the reverse domains for very good > reasons. No, the ripe database contains in the moment data for at least 21 top level (country) domains. > 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. The ripe database was always very well in service. -- With kind regards Michael Holzt From jens.huenerberg at logivision.de Thu Jun 29 17:33:35 2000 From: jens.huenerberg at logivision.de (Jens Huenerberg) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 17:33:35 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Michael Holzt wrote: > I just got response from the denic regarding my questions about future > updates to handles. [...] We would really like to act supportive - but somehow it came we cannot. Noone asked or told us by time. There was no information available in advance and the update session itself was a whole mess. Handles have been changed to mnt-by: DENIC-P even if we have had them protected with our mnt object just a day before. Even better, the corrected address data has also been changed. The reason for this was the use of a two or more days old data backup as a basis for the updates. This leads to a well known problem: lost updates. Great deal. Interestingly, at least some of these overwritten updates came back later. Furthermore, I cannot understand the rules which have been applied to the importer of the DENIC database. Which data is now there? Yesterday's RIPE data? One week before? With corrected updates? And so on.... A strategy that prevents small providers from self-managing "their" domains is inacceptable for us, as well. Stupid enough, that only DENIC members can modify or register domain names. Now, all information should be unchangeable for others than them? Why? In other countries and the internet as a whole, decentralization means deregulation. Maybe, that it is needed that .de domains and data has to leave the RIPE's main database. But does this also mean that handling has to be different or principalized? I say no. -- Best regards, Dipl.-Inform. Jens H|nerberg T: +49-30-39909070 Logivision GmbH F: +49-30-39909079 Alt-Moabit 96c E: info at logivision.de 10559 Berlin W: www.logivision.de Germany From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 09:31:07 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 09:31:07 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hello Thomas, On 29.06.00 16:49 Thomas Krause wrote: > > > Hi, > > must be a really stupid conversion procedure ... A large part here in > east germany has a leading zero at the ZIP-Code - nice that > these zeros where removed ... > > role: Hostmaster Webmatic > address: Webmatic Kommunikations GmbH > address: Weissenfelser Str. 46a > address: 6217 Merseburg > address: DE > e-mail: hostmaster at webmatic.de > nic-hdl: WMT1-RIPE > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 20000321 > source: DENIC I am very sorry about these bug and I think we will fix it asap. I know thats not an excuse but - even after a 4 weeks test period - you are the first pointing us to this failure. Regrads Sabine > > Regards, > Thomas. > > > > Thorsten Schreiner wrote: > > > > henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > > > Hi, > > > > another nice thing: We just got an error message, saying that > > DENIC tried to CHANGE a RIPE-HANDLE we protected by "mnt-by"... > > > > btw: whois.nic.de doesn't respond to whois-queries at the moment :-) > > > > I think they want to become a BIG player... but actually can't right > > now. > > > > Bye, Thorsten > > > > -- > > mailto:ths at salink.net | Thorsten Schreiner > > http://www.salink.net | SaLink Netzwerkgesellschaft mbH > > tel: +49 681 93 47 51 | Im Stadtwald, Geb. 30 > > fax: +49 681 93 47 55 | 66123 Saarbruecken > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Thomas Krause Webmatic Kommunikations GmbH > Tel: +49 3461 336630 > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 09:57:34 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 09:57:34 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: Deletion of German domain objects Message-ID: On 29.06.00 16:20 Marcus Rist wrote: > > Hi, > > Engin Gunduz wrote To mediaWays Hostmaster: > > On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, mediaWays Hostmaster wrote: > > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > > > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > > > "NEVER_REFD" now? > > > > Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change > > anything in the consistency project regarding to .de > > domain deletions. Even we did change something, since > > person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple > > of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, > > our changes would be void. > > Just to be sure and because we've discused it over here heavily: > > RIPE will not delete any person object in the RIPE database that is > marked as NEVER_REFD but protected by any kind of maintainer, right? we have discussed these concerns with the database people in RIPE and we both understand that a deletion of the person objects should only be done after a complete migration of this data to DENIC. Regards Sabine > > best regards > -Marcus > > -- > Marcus Rist > email: marcus at netplace.de > netplace Telematic GmbH fon: +49 89 551805-23 > http://www.netplace.de/ fax: +49 89 551805-24 > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 10:39:51 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 10:39:51 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hello, speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we have (or even must) done the migration. First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. Problems: There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain their database for this amount of objects. There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or assist us in this kind of service. There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see rfc2782 for a documentation) Solution So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with the applicant. Whats necessary concerning a domainname? We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the only thing you need. Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses and so we will implement this very soon. I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and you see know the other side a little bit better, Regards Sabine On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > once again in english: > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think on > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no domain > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us could > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be a > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the role:s) > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) is > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info is > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german domain! > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the domain > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that even > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for us! > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is not > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > back a few years, please. > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC or > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop our > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > This can not be the way to our future. > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your DENIC > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > board... > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > Robert > Martin-Leg?ne To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of > .de domain objects > Sent by: > r at jenslyn.nisse > .dk > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > Hallo. > > This is a list in English. > > What did you write? > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr > sehr > > gerne. > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an die > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von > uns > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten > und > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > unverantwortlich. > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r whois > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > alle, > > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist eine > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > Arbeitsweise > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. > Bei > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r > uns > > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder > deren > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich > alle > > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und > > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > Land, > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. > Folge > > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > Gruss > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > Coordination To: > > > Center" cc: > > .de domain objects > > pe.de> > > > > 29.06.00 > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > weia. > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > MfG > > Martin Ahrens > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > Kram. > > > > Gruss > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > Coordination To: > > > Center" cc: > > > domain objects > > pe.de> > > > > 29.06.00 > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > ?bernahme? > > > > MfG > > Martin Ahrens > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im Auftrag > > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > roles > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > > n cc: > > > domain > > objects > > e.net> > > Sent by: > > owner-lir-wg@ > > ripe.net > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > European Summer Time. > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > > > -- > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 11:15:03 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:15:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hello Henning, First of all you REALLY ought to use ENGLISH on the RIPE Mailing lists. Not everybody speaks German, you know? Second of all, the plan to move .de Domains has been discussed on ripe meetings etc. You could have gone there and voiced your concerns. Third of all, .de Domain objects have nothing to do in the RIPE Database. RIPE isn't about Domains. And last but not least, so what if you have to change your robots? That's life and sooner or later you'd have to do it anyway. Your rant about person objects is totally invalid since so far, only the Domain objects have been moved and you have plenty of time to accomodate the changes necessary for Person objects. Best wishes, Nils On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr sehr > gerne. > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an die > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von uns > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten und > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich unverantwortlich. > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r whois > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder alle, > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist eine > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige Arbeitsweise > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. Bei > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r uns > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder deren > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich alle > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins Land, > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. Folge > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > Gruss > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "NCC Network > Coordination To: > Center" cc: > pe.de> > > 29.06.00 > 18:04 > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au weia. > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > MfG > Martin Ahrens > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer Kram. > > Gruss > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "NCC Network > Coordination To: > Center" cc: > domain objects > pe.de> > > 29.06.00 > 16:00 > > > > > > > Hallo, > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > ?bernahme? > > MfG > Martin Ahrens > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im Auftrag > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > Hi, > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > had also "DENIC" as source. > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > NOC54-RIPE. > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > RIPE Database > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > n cc: > domain > objects > e.net> > Sent by: > owner-lir-wg@ > ripe.net > > > 29.06.00 > 12:45 > > > > > > > > -------- > Dear Colleauges, > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > European Summer Time. > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > -- > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From lutz.gruenenwald at de.easynet.net Thu Jun 29 18:25:27 2000 From: lutz.gruenenwald at de.easynet.net (Lutz Gruenenwald) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:25:27 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <395B6217.C07409EB@webmatic.de> Message-ID: OOPS! > must be a really stupid conversion procedure ... A large part here in > east germany has a leading zero at the ZIP-Code - nice that > these zeros where removed ... [...] > address: Weissenfelser Str. 46a > address: 6217 Merseburg > address: DE That definitely is weird. (But other weirdos say, it can be fixed with one line of perl.) :-) Lutz Gruenenwald easynet, Munich From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Fri Jun 30 11:07:59 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:07:59 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hi, thats not really the point of our critics. a) changes only be made by members???? b) technical solution - RIPE's solutions are working really good, DENIC's past solutions are poor c) change in interfaces not acceptable d) contact info's, especially phone and fax, are REALLY important for the hostmasters to inform each other about technical probs. If this could be against German's laws, just make these fields optional. e) putting so named "non-operational data" or "test data" which is incomplete and partly incorrect in production systems (it IS in productionis - just do an whoi-query...) is not acceptable f) plans making life for non-members harder -> DENIC tries to get more payin' members???? g) plans to charge for person: and role: records? h) to be continued... pls see http://denicpetition.bsws.de Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE "Sabine Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de c" cc: db-wg at ripe.net, info at denic.de, lir-wg at ripe.net, robert at martin-legene.dk 30.06.00 10:39 Hello, speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we have (or even must) done the migration. First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. Problems: There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain their database for this amount of objects. There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or assist us in this kind of service. There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see rfc2782 for a documentation) Solution So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with the applicant. Whats necessary concerning a domainname? We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the only thing you need. Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses and so we will implement this very soon. I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and you see know the other side a little bit better, Regards Sabine On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > once again in english: > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think on > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no domain > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us could > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be a > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the role:s) > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) is > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info is > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german domain! > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the domain > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that even > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for us! > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is not > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > back a few years, please. > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC or > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop our > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > This can not be the way to our future. > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your DENIC > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > board... > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > Robert > Martin-Leg?ne To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of > .de domain objects > Sent by: > r at jenslyn.nisse > .dk > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > Hallo. > > This is a list in English. > > What did you write? > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr > sehr > > gerne. > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an die > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von > uns > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten > und > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > unverantwortlich. > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r whois > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > alle, > > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist eine > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > Arbeitsweise > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. > Bei > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r > uns > > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder > deren > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich > alle > > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und > > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > Land, > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. > Folge > > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > Gruss > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > Coordination To: > > > Center" cc: > > .de domain objects > > pe.de> > > > > 29.06.00 > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > weia. > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > MfG > > Martin Ahrens > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > Kram. > > > > Gruss > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > Coordination To: > > > Center" cc: > > > domain objects > > pe.de> > > > > 29.06.00 > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > ?bernahme? > > > > MfG > > Martin Ahrens > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im Auftrag > > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > roles > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > > n cc: > > > domain > > objects > > e.net> > > Sent by: > > owner-lir-wg@ > > ripe.net > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > European Summer Time. > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > > > -- > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 12:02:08 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:02:08 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000629185847.A263@fqdn.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Michael Holzt wrote: > Perhaps it wasn't designed for this usage, but it was clearly the best > system we ever had for domain registry. You could use the same person > handles for a number of top level domains which reduced the work in a great Yes and once upon a time you could use RIPE handles in .com domains... More centralization isn't always a good thing. I would want the "central internet database" you propose to be run by NSI for example, or for that matter, any US entity. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From noc at entire-systems.com Fri Jun 30 12:05:46 2000 From: noc at entire-systems.com (Daniel Roesen) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:05:46 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: ; from dolderer@denic.de on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 10:39:51AM +0200 References: Message-ID: <20000630120546.A22186@entire-systems.com> Dear Sabine, On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 10:39:51AM +0200, Sabine Dolderer/Denic wrote: > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > have (or even must) done the migration. Please explain why you remove the well-working maintainer scheme. > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > laws. It is allowed. Every customer agreed that his information is published in a public database. > Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. Regarding phone, fax and email addresses: with this logic even phone books would be illegal. > I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling > that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good > reasons or just to make them angry. Please explain why this was all negotiated behind closed doors (RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-l ARE closed doors) although it has a wide impact on ALL domain customers and non-DENIC-members (resellers). Best regards, Daniel Roesen Entire Systems NOC -- Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc at entire-systems.com Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 11:55:41 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:55:41 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <200006291540.RAA06682@mara.mops.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 100, Sebastian Willing wrote: > ....and what if a handle is deleted from one DB but not from the other? Once > the handle # is re-assigned, the owner of a domain depends on the server you > ask. And how should this happen? > I think, the best thing is to restore the deleted records from RIPE backups and > to remove the referer to the DeNic-whois-server until either the DeNic is paying > or is running a workable service (maybe with references to the RIPE-whois-server > for persons). Why? The .de objects are only in the denic db at this point, so no inconsistencies can arise. Besides, where's the problem? I can set up my own whois db and put myself in as the owner of microsoft.de or whatever, but no-one will care because everybody knows that the authoritive db is whois.denic.de - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From guardian at nacamar.de Fri Jun 30 11:21:56 2000 From: guardian at nacamar.de (Nacamar AS Guardian) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:21:56 +0200 (CEST) Subject: petition against DENIC's plans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. > Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de have you read http://www.denic.de/doc/DENIC/presse/datenschutz.html or http://www.denic.de/doc/DENIC/presse/datenschutz.en.html ? > Greetings from Germany > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS Best Regards, HaJo Gurt ------------------------------------------------------------------- Hans-Joachim Gurt NACAMAR Data Communications Nacamar Network Administration Robert-Bosch-Str. 32 D-63303 Dreieich / Germany gurt at nacamar.de guardian at nacamar.net Voice: +49 6103 916 0 Fax: +49 6103 916 222 ------------------------------------------------------------------- My name is Borg, James Borg. License to assimilate. From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 11:52:26 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:52:26 +0200 (CEST) Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > Once again: We are not against moving domain-objects out of the Ripe-Db, we > could even live with the persons and roles in a DENIC-Database. That is your right, however, it won't change a thing. ;-) > But the way DENIC is doing the move, wirh cripled testing data in > production, is not acceptable. The plan to let only members do changes is > not acceptable. Where do you see crippled data in denic's db? Report it to them as a bug. When I look at our own main domain (work.de) the only thing I see is a pretty ugly "changed" line, but that is hardly critcal. > Nobody would say anything against moving all the stuff to the DENIC db if > the interfaces won't change too much. The interface didn't change a lot, the output of the whois db is pretty much the same as with ripe db. > The way this is done now means really hard life for small providers in the > future and tons of work (senseless work) now. I completely fail to see the problem. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 11:32:53 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:32:53 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Michael Holzt wrote: > 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. No, it is not. It will greatly help with the consistency of Person objects. Several of our customers have several RIPE Handles - Just because each is mnt-by a different provider. > 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). OBVIOUSLY since the Person handles have not yet been migrated, the person data in denic's database is not authoritive. > 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. So WHY did you NOT set your own maintainer before Denic did so? I seem to remember quite clearly that there was advanced warning of this. You do realize that a person without a maintainer can be changed by ANYBODY? This is a serious security risk and could lead to the loss of domains, etc. > Why has this mess had to happen? Maybe because people like you don't pay attention until after the fact...? Best wishes, Nils Jeppe - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Fri Jun 30 11:20:56 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:20:56 +0200 Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Sorry for the German mail, i explained this before (got a german mail an just replied). Once again: We are not against moving domain-objects out of the Ripe-Db, we could even live with the persons and roles in a DENIC-Database. But the way DENIC is doing the move, wirh cripled testing data in production, is not acceptable. The plan to let only members do changes is not acceptable. Nobody would say anything against moving all the stuff to the DENIC db if the interfaces won't change too much. The way this is done now means really hard life for small providers in the future and tons of work (senseless work) now. Greetings Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE Nils Jeppe cc: NCC Network Coordination Center , owner-loca-ir at ripe.net, lir-wg at ripe.net, info at denic.de 30.06.00 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects 11:15 Hello Henning, First of all you REALLY ought to use ENGLISH on the RIPE Mailing lists. Not everybody speaks German, you know? Second of all, the plan to move .de Domains has been discussed on ripe meetings etc. You could have gone there and voiced your concerns. Third of all, .de Domain objects have nothing to do in the RIPE Database. RIPE isn't about Domains. And last but not least, so what if you have to change your robots? That's life and sooner or later you'd have to do it anyway. Your rant about person objects is totally invalid since so far, only the Domain objects have been moved and you have plenty of time to accomodate the changes necessary for Person objects. Best wishes, Nils On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr sehr > gerne. > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an die > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von uns > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten und > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich unverantwortlich. > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r whois > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder alle, > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist eine > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige Arbeitsweise > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. Bei > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r uns > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder deren > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich alle > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins Land, > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. Folge > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > Gruss > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "NCC Network > Coordination To: > Center" cc: > pe.de> > > 29.06.00 > 18:04 > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au weia. > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > MfG > Martin Ahrens > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer Kram. > > Gruss > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "NCC Network > Coordination To: > Center" cc: > domain objects > pe.de> > > 29.06.00 > 16:00 > > > > > > > Hallo, > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > ?bernahme? > > MfG > Martin Ahrens > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im Auftrag > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > Hi, > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles > had also "DENIC" as source. > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > NOC54-RIPE. > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > RIPE Database > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > n cc: > domain > objects > e.net> > Sent by: > owner-lir-wg@ > ripe.net > > > 29.06.00 > 12:45 > > > > > > > > -------- > Dear Colleauges, > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > European Summer Time. > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > -- > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From andrea.campi at it.worldonline.com Fri Jun 30 11:34:28 2000 From: andrea.campi at it.worldonline.com (Andrea Campi) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:34:28 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <200006291540.RAA06682@mara.mops.net> Message-ID: <009101bfe276$63739240$1610f0c3@tech.worldonline.it> > > 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 what if a handle is deleted from one DB but not from the other? Once > the handle # is re-assigned, the owner of a domain depends on the server you > ask. Which by the way is what we have in Italy thanks to IT-NIC... So it looks this is the "standard" way ... but it being standard doesn't make it less braindead!! Bye, Andrea From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Fri Jun 30 11:55:36 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:55:36 +0200 Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hi, you'll see the crippled data if you would look at the person-a nd role-handles. Just comapre whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE with whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. The changes at the interface: i dont think of the whois-output here, what is important is the change in update/create/delete-procedure. Gruss Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE Nils Jeppe cc: info at denic.de, lir-wg at ripe.net, NCC Network Coordination Center , owner-loca-ir at ripe.net 30.06.00 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects 11:52 On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > Once again: We are not against moving domain-objects out of the Ripe-Db, we > could even live with the persons and roles in a DENIC-Database. That is your right, however, it won't change a thing. ;-) > But the way DENIC is doing the move, wirh cripled testing data in > production, is not acceptable. The plan to let only members do changes is > not acceptable. Where do you see crippled data in denic's db? Report it to them as a bug. When I look at our own main domain (work.de) the only thing I see is a pretty ugly "changed" line, but that is hardly critcal. > Nobody would say anything against moving all the stuff to the DENIC db if > the interfaces won't change too much. The interface didn't change a lot, the output of the whois db is pretty much the same as with ripe db. > The way this is done now means really hard life for small providers in the > future and tons of work (senseless work) now. I completely fail to see the problem. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From noc at entire-systems.com Fri Jun 30 12:42:00 2000 From: noc at entire-systems.com (Daniel Roesen) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:42:00 +0200 Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: ; from nils@work.de on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 11:52:26AM +0200 References: Message-ID: <20000630124200.B24081@entire-systems.com> On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 11:52:26AM +0200, Nils Jeppe wrote: > Where do you see crippled data in denic's db? In every response to a domain query to whois.denic.de (also via DENIC whois cgi gateway). > the output of the whois db is pretty > much the same as with ripe db. You're kidding. Compare NOC54-RIPE in RIPEdb and in DENICdb (if you get through to whois.denic.de). BTW: access to whois.denic.de is a matter of shear LUCK. Referred query to host whois.denic.de at port 43 failed. Reason: Connect to host: whois.denic.de port: 43 failed: Connection refused > > The way this is done now means really hard life for small providers in the > > future and tons of work (senseless work) now. > > I completely fail to see the problem. Obviously. Daniel Roesen Entire Systems NOC -- Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc at entire-systems.com Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stephenb at uk.uu.net Fri Jun 30 14:41:24 2000 From: stephenb at uk.uu.net (Stephen Burley) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:41:24 +0000 Subject: petition against DENIC's plans References: Message-ID: <395C9574.C801590@uk.uu.net> henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > Hi all, > > I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. > Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de > I just copied my mails regarding this, so if there is anybody out to > rewrite the text... please send them to hostmaster at bsws.de. Why? its not our remit to do this, the issue was discussed at the RIPE meetings as i have tried to show and concensus was reached, the domains will move from the RIPE DB and how deNIC do this is their problem. And they will not be supported when we move to the RPSL version of the DB. Bottom line - the domains should not be there in the first place we are an IP community not a domain community. If you have a problem with deNIC and its migration policy raise it with them not us, at the very least raise it in CENTR's discussion forums that is why the RIPE community set this up. I really do not see what the big problem is, if you see a problem with the way deNIC is migrating the objects then instead of bitching about it help them fix it in the right forum not ours. We did not put the objects there so why complain to us when we have put up with this abuse for so long of our IP based systems, we do not want to keep them we want them out of our DB. Regards Stephen Burley UUNET EMEA Hostmaster > > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE From stephenb at uk.uu.net Fri Jun 30 15:00:26 2000 From: stephenb at uk.uu.net (Stephen Burley) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:00:26 +0000 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <395B4334.D6A9E554@salink.net> <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> <395B789B.FFC45956@uk.uu.net> <20000629185847.A263@fqdn.org> Message-ID: <395C99EA.E16AF669@uk.uu.net> Michael Holzt wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 04:26:03PM +0000, Stephen Burley wrote: > > That ones easy, it should never have been used for this info RIPE is the > > rIPe repository not the domains authority. > > Perhaps it wasn't designed for this usage, but it was clearly the best > system we ever had for domain registry. No it was the best publicly available without re-engineering it, which does not give you (deNIC) the right to use it. > You could use the same person > handles for a number of top level domains which reduced the work in a great > way. Now we will have to cope with different person handles for every > registry, with complicated update procedures and so on. > Good process, wrong DB, the software to run the identical DB structure has always been available to use and create your own (deNIC's) copy cat DB taking advantage of the fine processes put in place by the RIPE community and the engineering of the DB team in the NCC. So there was never any need to populate our DB just to take advantage of the DB structure - deNIC should have created there own. > > The wiser solution would be, if the registries would have agreed on > supporting the central ripe database by funding and services. I don't see > how the costs can be lower for several independent registries than for one > community-payed-for central registry. Look to CENTR for this not the RIPE community. > > > If you want to see what can happen when all this information disappears from > ripe and will be moved to other registries, just take the DeNIC (or the > CORE) as an example. For both registries i don't know how to update my > handles or can do it only by asking an official registrar / member. > > This fragmentation of registries will only lead to unreliable and outdated > informations in the databases. That is what CENTR is for, use it. > > > > The only domains that are in there are the reverse domains for very good > > reasons. > > No, the ripe database contains in the moment data for at least 21 top > level (country) domains. > Which is fine but i think it will also move to servers run by CENTR eventualy - and again they are there for historicaly good reasons. > > > 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. > > The ripe database was always very well in service. Wrong the most objects in the DB are now domain objects and most of the updates are for person obs and domain obs - as reported at all RIPE meetings - and the response time to updates is considerably impacted by the amount dom and person objects being queried and updated. Regards Stephen Burley UUNET EMEA Hostmaster > > > -- > With kind regards > > Michael Holzt From hostmaster at mediaways.net Fri Jun 30 13:08:22 2000 From: hostmaster at mediaways.net (mediaWays Hostmaster) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:08:22 +0200 Subject: QOS of whois.nic.de Message-ID: <20000630110822.565.qmail@demdwu24.mediaways.net> Wow! Good Quality of Service: > whois -h whois.nic.de dealtime.de Connection refused; server has reached maximum number of clients. ... Kind regards, _____________________________ Stephan Mankopf +49 5241 80 88729 stephan.mankopf at mediaways.net From noc at entire-systems.com Fri Jun 30 12:31:27 2000 From: noc at entire-systems.com (Daniel Roesen) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:31:27 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: ; from nils@work.de on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 11:32:53AM +0200 References: <20000629154454.B816@fqdn.org> Message-ID: <20000630123127.A24081@entire-systems.com> On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 11:32:53AM +0200, Nils Jeppe wrote: > It will greatly help with the consistency of Person objects. > Several of our customers have several RIPE Handles - Just because > each is mnt-by a different provider. AFAIK this will not change es DENIC-handles will be tied to DENIC-members, too. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. > OBVIOUSLY since the Person handles have not yet been migrated, the person > data in denic's database is not authoritive. But it gets delivered to querying clients. Without any information about the data being non-authoritative and people should query RIPE. > So WHY did you NOT set your own maintainer before Denic did so? Thats another question. What DENIC did I would call "hijacking". Not everyone knows the DENIC-P password. > You do realize that a person without a maintainer can be changed by > ANYBODY? You do realize that he's not able to change his data anymore but DENIC? > This is a serious security risk and could lead to the loss of > domains, etc. DENIC is not responsible for the security of RIPE person/role objects. This is plain insolent. Do you think CRYPT-PW are secure? C'mon... Do you think DENICs methods to "protect" things are secure? NOW we can use PGP-AUTH to protect our data. Best regards, Daniel -- Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc at entire-systems.com Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 13:34:58 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:34:58 +0200 (CEST) Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000630124200.B24081@entire-systems.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Daniel Roesen wrote: > You're kidding. Compare NOC54-RIPE in RIPEdb and in DENICdb (if you > get through to whois.denic.de). Well, as I have mentioned before, the person objects have not yet been ported to the denic whois server. Everything you see there in the way of person objects therefore can be expected to be inconsistent. > BTW: access to whois.denic.de is a matter of shear LUCK. I get a "reached maximum number of clients" right now. This is of course a problem, but can be expected in the first few days of service, give them a chance. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From nils at work.de Fri Jun 30 11:58:54 2000 From: nils at work.de (Nils Jeppe) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:58:54 +0200 (CEST) Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > you'll see the crippled data if you would look at the person-a nd > role-handles. Just comapre whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE with whois -h > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. The Person data in the whois db of denic is not authoritive. RIPE Handles get handled by RIPE. So where's the problem? > The changes at the interface: i dont think of the whois-output here, what > is important is the change in update/create/delete-procedure. Oh, well, too bad - you will have to change it then. These things happen. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n at work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/ From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 11:10:30 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:10:30 +0200 Subject: Antwort: petition against DENIC's plans Message-ID: Hello, On 30.06.00 11:01 Sabine Dolderer wrote: > On 30.06.00 10:57 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. > > Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de > > I just copied my mails regarding this, so if there is anybody out to > > rewrite the text... please send them to hostmaster at bsws.de. personally I am not happy that you choose to try to change a decision which was made after a long discussion with a lot of people involved (Starting at a Technical meeting at DENIC one year ago and followed by a lot of discussions at several RIPE meetings) but as a matter of fairness I think you should try to inform the people signing the petition also about the process and the reasons. If you choose to do so you find more information about this issue under http://www.denic.de/doc/DENIC/presse/datenschutz.html or in my last mail to this issue, Thank you Sabine > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > Sabine Dolderer > DENIC eG > Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 > D-60329 Frankfurt > > eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de > Fon: +49 69 27235 0 > Fax: +49 69 27235 235 > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From sbernard at infonet.ee Fri Jun 30 11:45:24 2000 From: sbernard at infonet.ee (Konstantin Barinov) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:45:24 +0200 (EET) Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <395B789B.FFC45956@uk.uu.net> Message-ID: 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 > > From andrei at ripe.net Fri Jun 30 13:45:50 2000 From: andrei at ripe.net (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:45:50 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: Message-ID: <395C886E.97488820@ripe.net> [note local-ir is chopped from cc:] Jens Huenerberg wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Michael Holzt wrote: > > > I just got response from the denic regarding my questions about future > > updates to handles. [...] > > We would really like to act supportive - but somehow it came we cannot. > Noone asked or told us by time. There was no information available in > advance and the update session itself was a whole mess. Handles have been > changed to mnt-by: DENIC-P even if we have had them protected with our mnt > object just a day before. Even better, the corrected address data has also > been changed. The reason for this was the use of a two or more days old > data backup as a basis for the updates. This leads to a well known > problem: lost updates. Great deal. > > Interestingly, at least some of these overwritten updates came back later. > Furthermore, I cannot understand the rules which have been applied to the > importer of the DENIC database. Which data is now there? Yesterday's RIPE > data? One week before? With corrected updates? And so on.... Protection of unmaintained person objects referenced from *.de domains was essential because the setup of DENIC database was planned to be done in two phases: first moving domain objects, and then migrating person/role objects. Addition of DENIC-P maintainer prevented these person/role objects from accidental deletion in the period between the two phases. This was done as requested by DENIC and according to their policy. The reason this was done by RIPE NCC and not by DENIC themselves was the RIPE Database performance concerns. Unfortunately due to mistake some objects were updated that were not needed to be. These objects were converted back and the apologies were sent. > > A strategy that prevents small providers from self-managing "their" > domains is inacceptable for us, as well. Stupid enough, that only DENIC > members can modify or register domain names. Now, all information should > be unchangeable for others than them? Why? > > In other countries and the internet as a whole, decentralization means > deregulation. Maybe, that it is needed that .de domains and data has to > leave the RIPE's main database. But does this also mean that handling has > to be different or principalized? I say no. > > -- > Best regards, > > Dipl.-Inform. Jens H|nerberg T: +49-30-39909070 > Logivision GmbH F: +49-30-39909079 > Alt-Moabit 96c E: info at logivision.de > 10559 Berlin W: www.logivision.de > Germany Best regards, -- Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC From netmaster at space.net Fri Jun 30 12:49:27 2000 From: netmaster at space.net (Gert Doering, Netmaster) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:49:27 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000630120546.A22186@entire-systems.com>; from noc@entire-systems.com on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:05:46PM +0200 References: <20000630120546.A22186@entire-systems.com> Message-ID: <20000630124927.B11768@Space.Net> Hi, while I agree with some of the sentiments, one thing is just not true: On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:05:46PM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote: > > I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling > > that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good > > reasons or just to make them angry. > > Please explain why this was all negotiated behind closed doors > (RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-l ARE closed doors) The RIPE-Meetings are open for everybody. If you neglect to follow them (or read the minutes, which are open on the web), it's not anybody elses fault. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- SpaceNet GmbH Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Fri Jun 30 13:16:21 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:16:21 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: ----- Forwarded by Henning Brauer/BSWS/DE on 30.06.00 13:16 ----- Henning Brauer To: "Sabine Dolderer/Denic" 30.06.00 13:14 cc: Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects (Document link: Henning Brauer) a) agree. But the Maintainer-Scheme works really good, so I do nao see any reason for changing this. b) Just one Example (now): bss004:~ # whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE Connection refused; server has reached maximum number of clients. Anonther: dns.denic.de didn't answered authoritative for de-Domains Yesterday evening... c) No One would sya anything if you would just take the ripe-solution so we had to change email-adress for updates. Even other changes, like source: and perhaps phone, fax and so in beeing optional, would be acceptable. But there is no doc how updates will be made! d) customers do agree to this when putting ther data in the DB. As I said before: Just make phone and fax optional, everbody will agree. If it would be true what you are saying here, even Telephone books would be illegal. e) just compare whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE with whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. I'd like to show you this here, but DENIC's whois-Server is not reponding. The problem is that if you di an whois-query for an .de-Domain (in most cases using one of the web-interface) you'll see the crippeled data from ther denic whois-db. f) means there will be costs? You do not answer the question here. g) answer? Thanks for participationg this discussion. But why was this discussion not possible before doing the move?? As said before: RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-list ARE closed communities, the db-wg at ripe.net would have been the right place. Greetings Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE "Sabine Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de c" cc: db-wg at ripe.net, info at denic.de, lir-wg at ripe.net, robert at martin-legene.dk 30.06.00 12:44 Hello, On 30.06.00 11:07 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > thats not really the point of our critics. > a) changes only be made by members???? as every DE-domainowner is our customer and we are responisble to him about the security of his domainname we must assure that changes are made in a verifyable and accountable way. It is important that there is a documented responsibility. > b) technical solution - RIPE's solutions are working really good, DENIC's > past solutions are poor no comment. > c) change in interfaces not acceptable changes in interfaces are sometimes necessary. But I am with you that this should happen very rarely and should be prepared very well and people should be informed very soon -- but we tried to make all this. > d) contact info's, especially phone and fax, are REALLY important for the > hostmasters to inform each other about technical probs. If this could be > against German's laws, just make these fields optional. we are only allowed to publish these things if the custoumer have signed that he allows the publishing. Currently we think that from nearly none of the persons in the RIPE-DB this allowence is there. For the future we plan to let the people the choice to publish these data. > e) putting so named "non-operational data" or "test data" which is > incomplete and partly incorrect in production systems (it IS in > productionis - just do an whoi-query...) is not acceptable sorry I don't understand these point. Maybe you can show me an example of these "test data". > f) plans making life for non-members harder -> DENIC tries to get more > payin' members???? As we are working on a costrecovery base (non-profit) more members don't means automatically more income. But surely are we are interested in organisations taking the responsibitlity and sharing the risk to run the German Registry as a self regulating body for the benefits of the German Internet Community. > g) plans to charge for person: and role: records? > h) to be continued... Regards Sabine > > pls see http://denicpetition.bsws.de > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "Sabine > Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > c" cc: db-wg at ripe.net, info at denic.de, > lir-wg at ripe.net, robert at martin-legene.dk > Deletion of .de domain objects > ic.de> > > 30.06.00 > 10:39 > > > > > > > Hello, > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > have (or even must) done the migration. > > First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the > past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. > > Problems: > > There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the > RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain > their database for this amount of objects. > > There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for > domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or > assist us in this kind of service. > > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs > and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these > discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from > the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped > very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually > there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central > entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE > referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg > from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see > rfc2782 for a documentation) > > Solution > > So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the > domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed > the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it > was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there > should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. > > Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? > > I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we > are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with > the applicant. > > Whats necessary concerning a domainname? > > We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no > necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address > because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the > only thing you need. > > Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a > necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses > and so we will implement this very soon. > > I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am > really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people > felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make > them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and > you see know the other side a little bit better, > > Regards Sabine > > > On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > > once again in english: > > > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think > on > > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no > domain > > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us > could > > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be > a > > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the > role:s) > > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) > is > > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info > is > > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german > domain! > > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the > domain > > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that > even > > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for > us! > > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is > not > > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > > back a few years, please. > > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC > or > > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop > our > > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > > > This can not be the way to our future. > > > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your > DENIC > > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > > board... > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > Robert > > Martin-Leg?ne To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > > > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: > Deletion > of > > .de domain objects > > Sent by: > > r at jenslyn.nisse > > .dk > > > > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo. > > > > This is a list in English. > > > > What did you write? > > > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr > > sehr > > > gerne. > > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an > die > > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten > von > > uns > > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten > > und > > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > > unverantwortlich. > > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r > whois > > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > > alle, > > > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung > der > > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist > eine > > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > > Arbeitsweise > > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank > liegen. > > Bei > > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r > > uns > > > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder > > deren > > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle > direct > > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich > > alle > > > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > > > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind > und > > > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > > Land, > > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. > > Folge > > > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info at bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > > > > Center" cc: > > > of > > .de domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC > Maintainerlose > > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, > wie > > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > > weia. > > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > > > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon > bemerkt > > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > > Kram. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info at bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > > > > Center" cc: > > > .de > > > domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat > Daten > > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > > > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > > ?bernahme? > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im > Auftrag > > > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > > roles > > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info at bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > > > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > > > n cc: > > > > > domain > > > objects > > > e.net> > > > Sent by: > > > owner-lir-wg@ > > > ripe.net > > > > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > > European Summer Time. > > > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > > > > > -- > > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > > > > > > > Sabine Dolderer > DENIC eG > Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 > D-60329 Frankfurt > > eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de > Fon: +49 69 27235 0 > Fax: +49 69 27235 235 > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From jh at nextra.de Fri Jun 30 12:41:25 2000 From: jh at nextra.de (Jens Hoffmann) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:41:25 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: <20000630120546.A22186@entire-systems.com>; from noc@entire-systems.com on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:05:46PM +0200 References: <20000630120546.A22186@entire-systems.com> Message-ID: <20000630124125.A15441@ivm.net> Hi, On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:05:46PM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote: > It is allowed. Every customer agreed that his information is published > in a public database. Sorry to correct you on that, Daniel. For example: you never got a form from us, asking for your explicit permission to enter any data into any public database. That you knew in advance, what we would do with your data is of no help, because most customers don't know what they are doing, really ;)) > Regarding phone, fax and email addresses: with this logic even > phone books would be illegal. No, you should grab the TDDSG. The scope of Datenschutzgesetz and TDDSG is a little bit different. Greetings, Jens From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 11:33:09 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:33:09 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hello, On 29.06.00 17:40 Sebastian Willing wrote: > > Hello! > > 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. > The RIPE didn't want to serve the .de-namespace for free any longer and it > seems that the DeNic didn't want to pay for the services. > I agree that the better solution would have been to pay the RIPE for service. That was not an option we have as I tried to explain in another email. > > > > 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). No they are currently mirrored but we are not allowed to publish these data. > ....and what if a handle is deleted from one DB but not from the other? Once > the handle # is re-assigned, the owner of a domain depends on the server you > ask. The owner of the domain is the one stored in the DENIC database. Sabine > I think, the best thing is to restore the deleted records from RIPE backups and > to remove the referer to the DeNic-whois-server until either the DeNic is paying > or is running a workable service (maybe with references to the RIPE-whois-server > for persons). > Yours, > S.Willing > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From af at ins.de Fri Jun 30 13:26:24 2000 From: af at ins.de (Andreas Frackowiak) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:26:24 +0200 (MEST) Subject: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: from Sabine Dolderer/Denic at "Jun 30, 0 10:39:51 am" Message-ID: <200006301126.NAA07055@bra.ins.de> Dear Sabine, Sabine Dolderer/Denic schrieb per Mail : [...] > I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. Yes. Thank you. Can you point to a DENIC-document in which the new policies, on how DENIC will handle person-objects in the future, is defined ? It would also be helpful for better understandig. regards, Andreas -- INS Vertriebs GmbH A VIA NET.WORKS Company Postfach 101312 (PLZ 44543), Europaplatz 14 (PLZ 44575), Castrop-Rauxel Andreas Frackowiak Phone: +49-2305-101-0 Fax: +49-2305-101-155 af at ins.de From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 12:44:19 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:44:19 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hello, On 30.06.00 11:07 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > thats not really the point of our critics. > a) changes only be made by members???? as every DE-domainowner is our customer and we are responisble to him about the security of his domainname we must assure that changes are made in a verifyable and accountable way. It is important that there is a documented responsibility. > b) technical solution - RIPE's solutions are working really good, DENIC's > past solutions are poor no comment. > c) change in interfaces not acceptable changes in interfaces are sometimes necessary. But I am with you that this should happen very rarely and should be prepared very well and people should be informed very soon -- but we tried to make all this. > d) contact info's, especially phone and fax, are REALLY important for the > hostmasters to inform each other about technical probs. If this could be > against German's laws, just make these fields optional. we are only allowed to publish these things if the custoumer have signed that he allows the publishing. Currently we think that from nearly none of the persons in the RIPE-DB this allowence is there. For the future we plan to let the people the choice to publish these data. > e) putting so named "non-operational data" or "test data" which is > incomplete and partly incorrect in production systems (it IS in > productionis - just do an whoi-query...) is not acceptable sorry I don't understand these point. Maybe you can show me an example of these "test data". > f) plans making life for non-members harder -> DENIC tries to get more > payin' members???? As we are working on a costrecovery base (non-profit) more members don't means automatically more income. But surely are we are interested in organisations taking the responsibitlity and sharing the risk to run the German Registry as a self regulating body for the benefits of the German Internet Community. > g) plans to charge for person: and role: records? > h) to be continued... Regards Sabine > > pls see http://denicpetition.bsws.de > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info at bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "Sabine > Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > c" cc: db-wg at ripe.net, info at denic.de, > lir-wg at ripe.net, robert at martin-legene.dk > Deletion of .de domain objects > ic.de> > > 30.06.00 > 10:39 > > > > > > > Hello, > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > have (or even must) done the migration. > > First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the > past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. > > Problems: > > There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the > RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain > their database for this amount of objects. > > There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for > domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or > assist us in this kind of service. > > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs > and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these > discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from > the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped > very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually > there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central > entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE > referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg > from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see > rfc2782 for a documentation) > > Solution > > So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the > domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed > the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it > was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there > should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. > > Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? > > I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we > are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with > the applicant. > > Whats necessary concerning a domainname? > > We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no > necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address > because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the > only thing you need. > > Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a > necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses > and so we will implement this very soon. > > I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am > really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people > felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make > them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and > you see know the other side a little bit better, > > Regards Sabine > > > On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > > once again in english: > > > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think > on > > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no > domain > > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us > could > > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be > a > > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the > role:s) > > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) > is > > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info > is > > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german > domain! > > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the > domain > > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that > even > > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for > us! > > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is > not > > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > > back a few years, please. > > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC > or > > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop > our > > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > > > This can not be the way to our future. > > > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your > DENIC > > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > > board... > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info at bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > Robert > > Martin-Leg?ne To: henning.brauer at bsmail.de > > > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: > Deletion > of > > .de domain objects > > Sent by: > > r at jenslyn.nisse > > .dk > > > > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo. > > > > This is a list in English. > > > > What did you write? > > > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC s?he ich sehr > > sehr > > > gerne. > > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-L?sung, und wenn ich so an > die > > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > > Die L?sung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten > von > > uns > > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > > Arbeiten. Mit einer ?nderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > > DENIC-oder-nicht k?nnen wir wohl alle leben, mit v?llig neuen Formaten > > und > > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > > nicht. Das DENIC w?re gut beraten, die RIPE-L?sung zu ?bernehmen. > > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > > unverantwortlich. > > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen ?ber eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces f?r > whois > > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > > beschrieben, was f?r Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer f?r was zu > > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > > alle, > > > zum Teil unn?tzen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > > unn?tigerweise zus?tzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung > der > > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ?ndert und Infos rausfallen l?sst, ist > eine > > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > > Arbeitsweise > > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank > liegen. > > Bei > > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise f?r > > uns > > > nichts ?ndert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh ?bers DENIC oder > > deren > > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle > direct > > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn pl?tzlich > > alle > > > ?nderungen nur noch ?ber DENIC-Mitglieder m?glich sind - f?r uns als > > > nicht-Mitglied also nur ?ber nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind > und > > > eine automatisierbare M?glichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > > Land, > > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein v?llig neues Format rauslaufen. > > Folge > > > also? Wir m?ssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info at bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > > > > Center" cc: > > > of > > .de domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie w?rs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC > Maintainerlose > > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, > wie > > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > > weia. > > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon dar?ber gemutmasst, dass > > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder ?berhaupt ?nderungen > > > vornehmen k?nnen und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: henning.brauer at bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer at bsmail.de] > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon > bemerkt > > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > > Kram. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info at bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > > > > Center" cc: > > > .de > > > domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat > Daten > > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gek?rzter Form > > > ?bernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > > > changed: test at nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > > ?bernahme? > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: owner-local-ir at ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir at ripe.net]Im > Auftrag > > > von henning.brauer at bsmail.de > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > > An: lir-wg at ripe.net; db-wg at ripe.net; local-ir at ripe.net > > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > > roles > > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info at bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > > Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, > > > db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net > > > n cc: > > > > > domain > > > objects > > > e.net> > > > Sent by: > > > owner-lir-wg@ > > > ripe.net > > > > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > > European Summer Time. > > > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. > > > > > > -- > > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > > > > > > > Sabine Dolderer > DENIC eG > Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 > D-60329 Frankfurt > > eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de > Fon: +49 69 27235 0 > Fax: +49 69 27235 235 > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 13:04:50 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:04:50 +0200 Subject: Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hello Daniel, On 30.06.00 12:05 Daniel Roesen wrote: > > Dear Sabine, > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 10:39:51AM +0200, Sabine Dolderer/Denic wrote: > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > > have (or even must) done the migration. > > Please explain why you remove the well-working maintainer scheme. We don't remove the maintainer scheme. What we have done is to protect every Person which hasn't a maintainer with our maintainer to prevent people from deleting unreferenced objects. As these updates (~100.000) was generated, a lot of people started to recognize that there was a problem and sends updates with their maintainer. If you understand the RIPE queueing model you will know that small updates are served faster from RIPE than the bigger ones to keep chances fair. Therefore people saw that we try to put our maintainer to their one day earlier updated persons. They don't see that these requests are send one week earlier not knowing about the maintainer. As these updates were maid accidentally this was corrected later. BtW. If somebody wants to change a DENIC-P maintainer whith his own one. This can be done either by the DENIC member he cooperated with (prefered ;-) ) or by hostmaster at denic.de. BUT: Please keep in mind - we will go completely out of the RIPE-DB there is no need to create own maintainers for the meantime. > > > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > > laws. > > It is allowed. Every customer agreed that his information is published > in a public database. I want not to go too deeply in this discussion but believe me that it's not that easy. I still use these argumentation too hoping noone proofs it ;-). > > > Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > Regarding phone, fax and email addresses: with this logic even > phone books would be illegal. If you go for a telefon you are explicitely ask if you want to have additionally to the telefonline a phonebook entry. If you refuse you still get the line. > > > I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling > > that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good > > reasons or just to make them angry. > > Please explain why this was all negotiated behind closed doors > (RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-l ARE closed doors) although it has > a wide impact on ALL domain customers and non-DENIC-members > (resellers). RIPE-Meetings are open to everybody. The minutes are published on the web. Why do you beleave they are closed? Maybe you can give me a hint where you think that these sort of discussions should take place. Best Regards Sabine > > > Best regards, > > Daniel Roesen > Entire Systems NOC > > -- > Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc at entire-systems.com > Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany > InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 > GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc > GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no Fri Jun 30 15:21:15 2000 From: Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no (Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 15:21:15 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:45:50 +0200" <395C886E.97488820@ripe.net> References: <395C886E.97488820@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20000630152115H.he@runit.sintef.no> > Protection of unmaintained person objects referenced from *.de > domains was essential because the setup of DENIC database was > planned to be done in two phases: first moving domain objects, > and then migrating person/role objects. Yes, I now realize why this was done. I'm not sure I would have done it this way, but what's done is done (cross-database references doesn't strike me as a bright idea -- I would have waited until a complete database was in place at DENIC). However, it appears that the data in the RIPE database has undergone a considerable amount of decay since it was initially submitted. This has over time caused some of the pointers (nic handles) to be used where they shouldn't have been. In particular, I have seen "DENIC-P" pasted on person objects where I'm quite positive that the referenced person have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any domains under .DE. I've noticed this because I've lately been cleaning up the person objects which used to be referenced from the .NO domain objects, and a number of them have now become protected (where they weren't before). I don't know exactly what has caused this data decay; I'm quite positive that the .NO domain registry has always allocated new nic handles using "AUTO-xx" from the day that feature was available. Regards, - H?vard From dolderer at denic.de Fri Jun 30 16:27:35 2000 From: dolderer at denic.de (Sabine Dolderer/Denic) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 16:27:35 +0200 Subject: NEW MAILINGLIST for .de-issues !! Message-ID: Hello this is my very last mail (for now ;-) ) for things concerning DE-domains as I think (and it was told me) that the list was bothered to much. Further discussion could and should take place on the list public-l at denic.de You can subscribe to that list in simply sending an email to majordomo at denic.de with subscribe public-l in the body. You will then get a confirmation back which you have to send back again. I hope that this list will be a platform for the community to get in contact and discuss their issues with us. The prefered language on that list should be German. Regards Sabine Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenh?ttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer at denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 From andrei at ripe.net Fri Jun 30 18:41:33 2000 From: andrei at ripe.net (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:41:33 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects References: <395C886E.97488820@ripe.net> <20000630152115H.he@runit.sintef.no> Message-ID: <395CCDBD.CA6486E1@ripe.net> Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no wrote: > > > Protection of unmaintained person objects referenced from *.de > > domains was essential because the setup of DENIC database was > > planned to be done in two phases: first moving domain objects, > > and then migrating person/role objects. > > Yes, I now realize why this was done. I'm not sure I would have > done it this way, but what's done is done (cross-database references > doesn't strike me as a bright idea -- I would have waited until a > complete database was in place at DENIC). > > However, it appears that the data in the RIPE database has undergone > a considerable amount of decay since it was initially submitted. > This has over time caused some of the pointers (nic handles) to be > used where they shouldn't have been. > > In particular, I have seen "DENIC-P" pasted on person objects where > I'm quite positive that the referenced person have absolutely > nothing whatsoever to do with any domains under .DE. I've noticed > this because I've lately been cleaning up the person objects which > used to be referenced from the .NO domain objects, and a number of > them have now become protected (where they weren't before). > H?vard kindly supplied us with some examples of such nic-handles so we could look what happened. Those person objects that bear "mnt-by: DENIC-P" attribute were referenced from *.de domain objects before the latter were migrated. (We still keep *.de domains on our backup server so we were able to check this). > I don't know exactly what has caused this data decay; I'm quite > positive that the .NO domain registry has always allocated new nic > handles using "AUTO-xx" from the day that feature was available. > > Regards, > > - H?vard Regards, Andrei -- Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC From Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no Fri Jun 30 19:00:17 2000 From: Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no (Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 19:00:17 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:41:33 +0200" <395CCDBD.CA6486E1@ripe.net> References: <395CCDBD.CA6486E1@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20000630190017T.he@runit.sintef.no> > H?vard kindly supplied us with some examples of such > nic-handles so we could look what happened. Those person > objects that bear "mnt-by: DENIC-P" attribute were referenced > from *.de domain objects before the latter were migrated. (We > still keep *.de domains on our backup server so we were able to > check this). Yes, I expected that. However, it is my claim that almost all the references I sent you are in fact *not* reflecting the actual real-world situation, and that these references are therefore in all probability erroneous. That was what I meant when I said that the data in the RIPE DB has decayed. - H?vard From marcus at netplace.de Fri Jun 30 21:06:22 2000 From: marcus at netplace.de (Marcus Rist) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 21:06:22 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects In-Reply-To: ; from henning.brauer@bsmail.de on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 01:16:21PM +0200 References: Message-ID: <20000630210622.A15636@snickers.netplace.de> Hello, henning.brauer at bsmail.de wrote To db-wg at ripe.net: > c) No One would sya anything if you would just take the ripe-solution so we > had to change email-adress for updates. Even other changes, like source: > and perhaps phone, fax and so in beeing optional, would be acceptable. But > there is no doc how updates will be made! Maybe because there is no way to update it in the DENIC-db directly? These Objects in the DENIC-db are just mirrored and shortened from the RIPE-db. There are no DENIC-handles yet so there is no document how to update them. Just send a update for a RIPE-handle which is mirrored in the DENIC-db and see what happens in the DENIC-db. best regards -Marcus P.S.: Could you please shorten your mails from the parts you just senseless quote? Thanks. -- Marcus Rist email: marcus at netplace.de netplace Telematic GmbH fon: +49 89 551805-23 http://www.netplace.de/ fax: +49 89 551805-24 From henning.brauer at bsmail.de Thu Jun 29 13:23:11 2000 From: henning.brauer at bsmail.de (henning.brauer at bsmail.de) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:23:11 +0200 Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects Message-ID: Hi, I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles had also "DENIC" as source. But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info at bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE RIPE Database Administratio To: lir-wg at ripe.net, db-wg at ripe.net, local-ir at ripe.net n cc: Sent by: owner-lir-wg@ ripe.net 29.06.00 12:45 -------- Dear Colleauges, We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central European Summer Time. If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm at ripe.net. -- Filippo Portera