From Jan.Treufeldt at berlikomm.net Thu Apr 3 15:34:53 2003 From: Jan.Treufeldt at berlikomm.net (Jan.Treufeldt at berlikomm.net) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:34:53 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] testspace-allocation policy Message-ID: Hi all, as I remember there was a discussion about a policy for allocations needed by LIR's for test purposes. I haven't found a document in the ripe-store. Is there something in effect, yet? Is somebody working at it? Cheers, Jan. -- Jan Treufeldt eMail: Jan.Treufeldt at berlikomm.net BerliKomm Telekommunikationsgesellschaft mbH Fasanenstr. 85 Phone: +49 30 8188 9916 Berlin 10623 Fax: +49 30 8188 9974 From hroi at ngdc.net Thu Apr 3 16:40:59 2003 From: hroi at ngdc.net (Hroi Sigurdsson) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 16:40:59 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] testspace-allocation policy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E8C47FB.9050802@ngdc.net> Jan.Treufeldt at berlikomm.net wrote: > as I remember there was a discussion about a policy > for allocations needed by LIR's for test purposes. > > I haven't found a document in the ripe-store. > > Is there something in effect, yet? > Is somebody working at it? There is a note about experiments at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/asn-assignments.html#experiment-assignments -- Hroi Sigurdsson hroi at ngdc.net NetGroup A/S http://www.ngdc.net From leo at ripe.net Thu Apr 3 16:57:19 2003 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 16:57:19 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] testspace-allocation policy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jan, Jan.Treufeldt at berlikomm.net writes: >Hi all, > >as I remember there was a discussion about a policy >for allocations needed by LIR's for test purposes. > >I haven't found a document in the ripe-store. > >Is there something in effect, yet? >Is somebody working at it? The draft document was approved and is being integrated into the IPv4 Policy Document. The updated IPv4 Policy Document will be published as a draft in the near future. In the meantime, feel free to send in requests on the regular request form. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/internet-registries.html#request Kind regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services From pekkas at netcore.fi Thu Apr 3 18:45:11 2003 From: pekkas at netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 19:45:11 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [lir-wg] Experimental IPv6 address allocations policy Message-ID: Hi, I just recently noted that experimental IPv6 address allocations have been "sneaked in" the policy, as seen in: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments I must heavily object to this for a few reasons: 1) the intent is to keep the policy uniform, and this has not been discussed in the global-v6 policy mailing list. 2) RIPE43 minutes (posted on Oct 19 2002) list that this should be turned into a draft proposal [note: the URL for the presentation does not work]; There was a draft proposal on 28 Nov 2002 on "DRAFT: Experimental Internet Resource Allocations & Assignments". This is no longer available so I cannot verify the contents. 3) On 22 Jan 2003, new RIPE documents, 263 and 267 are available; these incorporate an experimental addressing policy. To my knowledge and according to my mail archives, neither of these has *ever* been as much as mentioned in the mailing lists (either ipv6 or lir wg) - not a single message. Is this sufficient in determining this is really what community wants? To clarify, are only those organizations which meet the criteria in section 5.1.1 applicable for experimental address allocations in: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments ? If the others can get experimental blocks, I'd be very much against it. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings From david at IPRG.nokia.com Fri Apr 4 02:42:57 2003 From: david at IPRG.nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 16:42:57 -0800 Subject: [lir-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Experimental IPv6 address allocations policy In-Reply-To: ; from pekkas@netcore.fi on Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:45:11PM +0300 References: Message-ID: <20030403164257.O29412@iprg.nokia.com> Pekka, On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:45:11PM +0300, ext Pekka Savola wrote: > > I just recently noted that experimental IPv6 address allocations have been > "sneaked in" the policy, as seen in: > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments > > I must heavily object to this for a few reasons: > > 1) the intent is to keep the policy uniform, and this has not been > discussed in the global-v6 policy mailing list. > > 2) RIPE43 minutes (posted on Oct 19 2002) list that this should be turned > into a draft proposal [note: the URL for the presentation does not work]; > There was a draft proposal on 28 Nov 2002 on "DRAFT: Experimental > Internet Resource Allocations & Assignments". This is no longer available > so I cannot verify the contents. > > 3) On 22 Jan 2003, new RIPE documents, 263 and 267 are available; these > incorporate an experimental addressing policy. > > To my knowledge and according to my mail archives, neither of these has > *ever* been as much as mentioned in the mailing lists (either ipv6 or lir > wg) - not a single message. I agree with your assessment. I don't agree with the procedure that was followed to get the wording on experimental addresses in the policy. > Is this sufficient in determining this is really what community wants? No. David K. PS please post follow up messages to the lir-wg only, the lir-wg deals with policy issues. --- From leo at ripe.net Fri Apr 4 09:28:50 2003 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:28:50 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Experimental IPv6 address allocations policy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3LujjFHyQTj+EwvL@ripe.net> Dear Pekka, The policy was proposed to the RIPE 43 meeting in Rhodes and then published as a draft for community comment. Following the comment period a further period of six weeks passed before the policy was published in a revised policy document. The changes from the previous version of the policy were recorded in the document change summary page at: The same policy was proposed to the APNIC community at the APNIC 14 meeting in Kitakyushu, JP and is now provisionally active. It was also proposed to the ARIN X meeting in Eugene, OR (as 2002-2). Minor regional policy differences can exist between the regions because of those regions' differing needs. This explains why discussion initially occurs within regional communities. Nonetheless, it is clear that changing the current common policy is being discussed in the APNIC, ARIN and RIPE regions. Perhaps that discussion should be moved to the global-v6 list. It might be useful to have separate discussions for changes to the common IPv6 policy and changes to the policy development process within in our region. The policy development process can be discussed on the mailing list. Kind regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services From pekkas at netcore.fi Fri Apr 4 18:57:32 2003 From: pekkas at netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 19:57:32 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [lir-wg] Re: Experimental IPv6 address allocations policy In-Reply-To: <3LujjFHyQTj+EwvL@ripe.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, leo vegoda wrote: > It might be useful to have separate discussions for changes to the > common IPv6 policy and changes to the policy development process within > in our region. The policy development process can be discussed on the > mailing list. A clarification request: I briefly mentioned this in the first message: Are only those organizations which meet the initial allocation criteria in section 5.1.1 applicable for experimental address allocations? (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments) For example, a LIR cannot (by design) request experimental addresses for its customer; correct? This seems to be the case, but I'd like to double check. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings From leo at ripe.net Fri Apr 4 19:11:07 2003 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 19:11:07 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] Re: Experimental IPv6 address allocations policy In-Reply-To: References: <3LujjFHyQTj+EwvL@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20030404171107.GB9372@ripe.net> Hi Pekka, On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 07:57:32PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, leo vegoda wrote: > > > It might be useful to have separate discussions for changes to the > > common IPv6 policy and changes to the policy development process within > > in our region. The policy development process can be discussed on the > > mailing list. > > A clarification request: I briefly mentioned this in the first message: I apologise for missing this in my last post. > Are only those organizations which meet the initial allocation criteria in > section 5.1.1 applicable for experimental address allocations? > (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments) > > For example, a LIR cannot (by design) request experimental addresses for > its customer; correct? > > This seems to be the case, but I'd like to double check. That is not how we would expect to interpret the policy. My interpretation is that the "Assignments for Internet Experiments" policy represents an exemption to the main body of the IPv6 policy. If an organisation performing an Internet experiment was not an LIR we would expect them to have their request sent in by a friendly LIR (a peer, upstream provider, etc...). Best regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services From crain at iana.org Fri Apr 4 22:23:46 2003 From: crain at iana.org (John L Crain) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:23:46 -0800 Subject: [lir-wg] 201/8 Allocated by IANA to LACNIC Message-ID: <710111980.20030404122346@iana.org> Hi Folks, This is a heads up to let you know that the IANA has alloacted the following range of IPv4 addresses to LACNIC. 201.0.0.0/8 A notation of the allocation has been made at . You may wish to adjust your filters accordingly. -- Best regards, John mailto:crain at iana.org From crain at iana.org Sat Apr 5 03:24:36 2003 From: crain at iana.org (John L Crain) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 17:24:36 -0800 Subject: [lir-wg] Update to IANA IPv4 Page Message-ID: <15028162124.20030404172436@iana.org> Hello All, A few days later than originally expected but: As announced to this list earlier this year, the IANA has updated the IPv4 Address pages http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space to reflect the status of the following ranges as listed below. 173/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 174/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 175/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 176/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 177/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 178/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 179/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 180/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 181/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 182/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 183/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 184/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 185/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 186/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 187/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 189/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved 190/8 Apr 03 IANA - Reserved Please send questions or comments to iana at iana.org -- Best regards, John mailto:crain at iana.org From crain at iana.org Tue Apr 8 22:38:23 2003 From: crain at iana.org (John L Crain) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:38:23 -0700 Subject: [lir-wg] 60/8 allocated to APNIC by IANA Message-ID: <9021035527.20030408133823@iana.org> Hi Folks, This is a heads up to let you know that the IANA has allocated the following range of IPv4 addresses to APNIC. 60.0.0.0/8 A notation of the allocation has been made at . The range 223/8 was at the same time returned to the IANA and it's status marked as IANA Reserved. You may wish to adjust your filters accordingly. -- Best regards, John Crain mailto:crain at iana.org From peter.galbavy at knowtion.net Mon Apr 14 23:32:36 2003 From: peter.galbavy at knowtion.net (Peter Galbavy) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 22:32:36 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE DB abuse by BSA (of all people) ? Message-ID: <003601c302cd$5eb00110$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> I received this today, could be spam (even if 'genuine') but the linking of the IP address to me is worrying. I used to be a registered contact on the IP range mentioned - years ago, so someone obviously has an old RIPE (or ARIN etc.) DB. I know of no other location that this IP range is linked to my personal details. Is this valid / legal use of the RIPE DB (given it is out of date and obviously an offline copy) ? If it isn't, someone in RIPE want to pick this up ? Peter Galbavy Knowtion Ltd. --- original --- Return-path: Envelope-to: peter at wonderland.org Delivery-date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:50:43 +0100 Received: from exim by mailstore-1.mail.knowledge.com with spam-scanned (Exim 3.33 #1) id 195AuZ-00023K-00 for peter at wonderland.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:50:43 +0100 Received: from [209.70.21.6] (helo=leads.bsa.org) by mailstore-1.mail.knowledge.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 195AuZ-00029t-00 for peter at wonderland.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:50:43 +0100 Received: from CBECK1 ([192.168.1.31]) by leads.bsa.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:00:33 -0400 To: "Peter Galbavy" From: Copyright Europe Subject: Case ID 670521 - Notice of Claimed Infringement Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <000000010103d407d3@[192.168.1.31]> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:00:32 -0400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Apr 2003 19:00:33.0188 (UTC) FILETIME=[20134E40:01C302B8] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: Monday, April 14, 2003 22 Chesterfield Road London N3 1PR England Cable and Wireless UK IP GSOC 1st Floor, Pinnacle House. Hartfie= ld R GB RE: Unauthorized Distribution of the following copyrighted computer progra= m(s): Adobe Illustrator Dear Sir/Madam: The Business Software Alliance (BSA) has determined that the connection lis= ted below, which appears to be using an Internet account under your control= , is using a Gnutella network to offer unlicensed copies of copyrighted com= puter programs published by the BSA's member companies. Infringement Details: ------------------------------ First Found: 27 Mar 2003 18:08:34 EST (GMT -500) Last Found: 13 Apr 2003 03:33:37 EST (GMT -500) Network: Bearshare IP Address: 212.36.41.234 IP Port: 6346 Protocol: Gnutella What was located as infringing content:=20 ------------------------------ Filename: adobe illustrator 10(with serial).zip (64,963kb) The above computer program(s) is/are being made available for copying, thro= ugh downloading, at the above location without authorization from the copyr= ight owner(s). Based upon BSA's representation of the copyright owners in anti-piracy matt= ers, we have a good faith belief that none of the materials or activities=20= listed above have been authorized by the rightholders, their agents, or the= law. BSA represents that the information in this notification is accurate= and states, under penalty of perjury, that it is authorized to act in this= matter on behalf of the copyright owners listed above. We hereby give notice of these activities to you and request that you take=20= expeditious action to remove or disable access to the materials described=20= above, and thereby prevent the illegal reproduction and distribution of pir= ated software via your company's network. As you know, illegal on-line acti= vities can result in 50 million people on the Internet accessing and downlo= ading a copyrighted product worldwide without authorization - a highly dama= ging activity for the copyright holder. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Please advise us regarding=20= what actions you take. Please include the following CaseID in any response you send: Case ID 67052= 1 Yours sincerely, Corinna Beck Business Software Alliance 1150 18th St NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036 http://www.bsa.org E-mail: copyright-europe at bsa.org From peter.galbavy at knowtion.net Mon Apr 14 23:46:03 2003 From: peter.galbavy at knowtion.net (Peter Galbavy) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 22:46:03 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE DB abuse by BSA (of all people) ? References: <003601c302cd$5eb00110$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> <20030414213840.GR77837@finch-staff-1.thus.net> Message-ID: <008501c302cf$403a8a50$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> Clive D.W. Feather wrote: > I would suggest that you write back and point out that an organisation > calling themselves "Copyright Europe" should stay out of Europe until > they understand the meanings of "Directive 95/46/EC" and "Directive > 2000/31/EC". They are a marketing organisation, why should they act in a legal way ? Sarcasm intended. > [The former is the basis of the Data Protection Act, with a > requirement to keep personal data up to date. The latter is the > Electronic Commerce Directive, which absolves ISPs from *all* legal > responsibility for > material where they act as a "mere conduit", which certainly applies > to Gnutella, even where they are aware of it.] In this instance, the IP range was assigned to an old consulting customer of mine that I set-up. After moving on, I got myself removed from the contacts, but not sure of the date. So the ISP angle doesn't apply (this time). Peter From clive at demon.net Mon Apr 14 23:38:40 2003 From: clive at demon.net (Clive D.W. Feather) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 22:38:40 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE DB abuse by BSA (of all people) ? In-Reply-To: <003601c302cd$5eb00110$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> References: <003601c302cd$5eb00110$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> Message-ID: <20030414213840.GR77837@finch-staff-1.thus.net> Peter Galbavy said: > I received this today, could be spam (even if 'genuine') but the linking of > the IP address to me is worrying. I used to be a registered contact on the > IP range mentioned - years ago, so someone obviously has an old RIPE (or > ARIN etc.) DB. [...] > From: Copyright Europe > The Business Software Alliance (BSA) has determined that the connection lis= > ted below, which appears to be using an Internet account under your control= > , is using a Gnutella network to offer unlicensed copies of copyrighted com= > puter programs published by the BSA's member companies. I would suggest that you write back and point out that an organisation calling themselves "Copyright Europe" should stay out of Europe until they understand the meanings of "Directive 95/46/EC" and "Directive 2000/31/EC". [The former is the basis of the Data Protection Act, with a requirement to keep personal data up to date. The latter is the Electronic Commerce Directive, which absolves ISPs from *all* legal responsibility for material where they act as a "mere conduit", which certainly applies to Gnutella, even where they are aware of it.] -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 Internet Expert | Home: | *** NOTE CHANGE *** Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Fax: +44 870 051 9937 Thus plc | | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 From ripe-dbm at ripe.net Wed Apr 16 16:04:33 2003 From: ripe-dbm at ripe.net (RIPE Database Manager) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:04:33 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] announcement of unreferenced person cleanup mechanism Message-ID: <200304161404.h3GE4Xdj025664@x61.ripe.net> [apologies for duplicate messages] Introduction ------------ The primary function of the person records in the RIPE Whois Database is to document the contact people for IP address space, Autonomous System Numbers, or routing-related records. While all the data in the RIPE Database can be viewed publicly, unnecessary public dispersal of the information may cause infringement privacy rights of individuals. Periodic automatic deletion of person objects that are not referenced as a contact will help to reduce the amount of private data and free the resources consumed by them. This cleanup was discussed on the Database Working Group mailing list, and previously presented as part of the development plans. More information can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/db-wg/2002/msg00096.html Clean-up Process ---------------- The proposed operation of periodically removing unreferenced person objects will consist of three steps: 1. Periodically counting the references to person objects. 2. Warning the owners of objects by e-mail if they are unreferenced for more than 60 days. 3. Deleting the object automatically if it is still unreferenced 30 days after the warning. The warning will be sent to the e-mail addresses in the "mnt- by:" or the "e-mail:" attributes of person objects. - If the person object is maintained, each maintainer will be notified as follows: - If there are "mnt-nfy:" attributes, the e-mail addresses listed there will be mailed. - Or, the e-mail addresses in the "e-mail:" fields of the "admin-c:" and "tech-c:" entries of the maintainers will be mailed. - If the person object is not maintained, and there are "e-mail:" attributes in the object, those e-mail addresses will be mailed. Due to the initial high amount of unreferenced person objects, the time intervals mentioned above will not be observed for all person objects. In order to eliminate possible service outages, a limited amount of warnings will be mailed and a limited amount of person objects will be deleted every day. Timeline -------- On Tuesday, 29 April, 2003, the first e-mails will be sent notifying the appropriate parties about person objects that have been unreferenced for more than 60 days. The first deletions will occur 30 days later, on Thursday, 29 May, 2003. The process will be an on-going service, and objects that become and remain unreferenced will be treated in the same manner in the future. -- Can Bican DB Group RIPE NCC From peter.galbavy at knowtion.net Thu Apr 17 13:58:42 2003 From: peter.galbavy at knowtion.net (Peter Galbavy) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 12:58:42 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again Message-ID: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> After replying to a thread on NANOG about ARIN costs, and my perceived relationship to those discussed here about RIPE earlier, I received an interesting mail from someone who said: [X] and I did a bunch of surprise visits to the RIPE hostmasters, to see how many were on duty each time. Out of 28, and average of two were on duty during business hours, with all the others on self-assigned "special projects" which nobody could define. They're up to 118 employees, at last count. If this is true - and I have no reason to believe otherwise - I am, if it at all possible, even more concerned at the waste of our money by RIPE and the ridiculous increases in members fees. Also, why are there 118 employees anyway ? Does anyone from RIPE want to comment, honestly and without the usual diplomatic rhetoric and self-protectionism so familiar to those like me who like to compare RIPE to an EU gravy train, on these allegations ? I would be interested in seeing information about work rotas and staffing well in time before the next AGM so that possible motions can be proposed and voted on, as is proper. rgds, -- Peter Galbavy Knowtion Ltd. From pim at bit.nl Thu Apr 17 14:03:32 2003 From: pim at bit.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:03:32 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again In-Reply-To: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> References: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> Message-ID: <20030417120332.GA47629@crow.bit.nl> On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 12:58:42PM +0100, Peter Galbavy wrote: | After replying to a thread on NANOG about ARIN costs, and my perceived | relationship to those discussed here about RIPE earlier, I received an | interesting mail from someone who said: [X] and I did a bunch of | surprise visits to the RIPE hostmasters, to see how many were on duty each | time. Out of 28, and average of two were on duty during business hours, | with all the others on self-assigned "special projects" which nobody could | define. They're up to 118 employees, at last count. I've been a visitor in the NCC offices on more than one occasion and have seen more than two hostmasters doing their job. I'm also very satisfied with the performance of the hostmaster team at the moment. IP and AS assignments are well within acceptable levels. groet, Pim -- __________________ Met vriendelijke groet, /\ ___/ Pim van Pelt /- \ _/ Business Internet Trends BV PBVP1-RIPE /--- \/ __________________ From neil at COLT.NET Thu Apr 17 15:53:04 2003 From: neil at COLT.NET (Neil J. McRae) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:53:04 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again In-Reply-To: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> Message-ID: <011e01c304e8$ab500de0$e75f4ad4@COLT> Peter, I share your sentiments on the size of the organisation, and the specific level of non-core activities that should not be funded by RIPE NCC membership fees, the RIPE meeting is one area that should be fully funded by those attending. The RIPE meeting should also have no impact to daily operations. I certainly feel that a higher level of productivity should have been deployed irrespective of the volume. Regards, Neil. From rendek at ripe.net Thu Apr 17 16:34:43 2003 From: rendek at ripe.net (Paul Rendek) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 16:34:43 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again In-Reply-To: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030417153314.0384f3c8@mailhost.ripe.net> Hi Peter, I regret that you have reached such a conclusion regarding the RIPE NCC's operations. The RIPE NCC Hostmasters have worked very hard to significantly improve and stablise service levels over the last year. The history of the level of service can be seen at: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/mem-services/registration/response-times.html As well as responding to requests for resources, Hostmasters are actively involved in projects that are clearly assigned and aimed at further improving efficiency and automation in service delivery. We continue to work on service improvements and look forward to our members actively contributing to this process via mailing lists and RIPE meetings. Regards, Paul Rendek RIPE NCC From peter.galbavy at knowtion.net Thu Apr 17 21:28:17 2003 From: peter.galbavy at knowtion.net (Peter Galbavy) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:28:17 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030417153314.0384f3c8@mailhost.ripe.net> Message-ID: <000f01c30517$9072dfa0$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> Paul Rendek wrote: > As well as responding to requests for resources, Hostmasters are > actively involved in projects that are clearly assigned and aimed at > further improving efficiency and automation in service delivery. ... and information about these projects is available for scrutiny at ... ? I suggest that the operational management of RIPE be prepared to answer specific questions about staffing levels, productivity and the distribution of resources at the NCC. Peter From oliver at bartels.de Thu Apr 17 21:35:02 2003 From: oliver at bartels.de (Oliver Bartels) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:35:02 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again In-Reply-To: <000f01c30517$9072dfa0$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> Message-ID: <200304171934.h3HJYfSA001032@alpha.bartels.de> On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:28:17 +0100, Peter Galbavy wrote: >I suggest that the operational management of RIPE be prepared to answer >specific questions about staffing levels, productivity and the distribution >of resources at the NCC. At theses days a lot of people tend to twist the cent twice and like to put additional "prepared to answer" work on the desk of those guys who do the real work. It is sad enough that this additional work imposed most often by finance people has the only intent to reduce the financial funding of these workers. Currently the RIPE anwering times are fine and I see no reason that they should be increased for us all because additional finance paperwork is demanded by those who twist the cent ... Have a nice holiday! Best Regards Oliver Bartels Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany oliver at bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0 From hank at att.net.il Thu Apr 17 23:28:56 2003 From: hank at att.net.il (Hank Nussbacher) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:28:56 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again In-Reply-To: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030417232804.00fb7ad8@max.att.net.il> At 12:58 PM 17-04-03 +0100, Peter Galbavy wrote: >After replying to a thread on NANOG about ARIN costs, and my perceived >relationship to those discussed here about RIPE earlier, I received an >interesting mail from someone who said: [X] and I did a bunch of >surprise visits to the RIPE hostmasters, to see how many were on duty each >time. Out of 28, and average of two were on duty during business hours, >with all the others on self-assigned "special projects" which nobody could >define. They're up to 118 employees, at last count. > >If this is true - and I have no reason to believe otherwise - I am, if it at >all possible, even more concerned at the waste of our money by RIPE and the >ridiculous increases in members fees. Also, why are there 118 employees >anyway ? Where did you get 118? I count 98 on the RIPE NCC staff page: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/about/staff/index.html -Hank >Does anyone from RIPE want to comment, honestly and without the usual >diplomatic rhetoric and self-protectionism so familiar to those like me who >like to compare RIPE to an EU gravy train, on these allegations ? I would be >interested in seeing information about work rotas and staffing well in time >before the next AGM so that possible motions can be proposed and voted on, >as is proper. > >rgds, >-- >Peter Galbavy >Knowtion Ltd. From gert at space.net Fri Apr 18 13:36:27 2003 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:36:27 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again In-Reply-To: <011e01c304e8$ab500de0$e75f4ad4@COLT>; from neil@COLT.NET on Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 02:53:04PM +0100 References: <015801c304d8$b13da4c0$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com> <011e01c304e8$ab500de0$e75f4ad4@COLT> Message-ID: <20030418133627.U3405@Space.Net> Hi, On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 02:53:04PM +0100, Neil J. McRae wrote: > I share your sentiments on the size of the organisation, > and the specific level of non-core activities that should > not be funded by RIPE NCC membership fees, the RIPE meeting is > one area that should be fully funded by those attending. As far as I understand the numbers, the RIPE meetings actually cover more than their own (direct) costs. > The RIPE meeting should also have no impact to daily operations. This is impossible. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 58512 (58485) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 From peter.galbavy at knowtion.net Fri Apr 18 15:35:41 2003 From: peter.galbavy at knowtion.net (Peter Galbavy) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:35:41 +0100 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE costs and staffing again References: <200304171934.h3HJYfSA001032@alpha.bartels.de> Message-ID: <006801c305af$6875eb80$28e0a8c0@walrus> > Currently the RIPE anwering times are fine and I see no reason > that they should be increased for us all because additional finance > paperwork is demanded by those who twist the cent ... Why do you make a direct, unbreakable link between 'answering times' and the budget ? There is *a* link, but it is not linear and certainly not transparent. I believe it is right to question how *my* money is spent and whether or not RIPE is providing an over-protected environment to its own staff and management while the rest of us are expected to pay up without question. Whether you like is or not, RIPE is a 'natural monopoly' and so should be very carefully watched to make sure it, as an organisation, is not abusing it's very priviledged position. Does anyone disagree that RIPE is a monopoly in it's territory ? Peter From webmaster at ripe.net Tue Apr 22 17:25:28 2003 From: webmaster at ripe.net (RIPE NCC WebMaster) Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:25:28 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE NCC Member Update Message-ID: <200304221525.h3MFPSSs005249@birch.ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC announces the release of the RIPE NCC Member Update. This bulletin is part of our continued effort to communicate relevant information more effectively and to encourage the participation of our members at RIPE Meetings and in formulating the RIPE NCC activity plan. You can find the latest edition of the Member Update at: http://www.ripe.net/newsletter The Member Update includes sections on: Proposed actions by the RIPE NCC based on the member survey results, including the benefits and impacts of proposals Information about recent and forthcoming RIPE Meetings Update on the LIR Portal and improved levels of service The new RIPE On Site Information Exchange ("ROSIE") RIPE Database updates RIPE NCC Training Courses and conference calendar This Member Update will be sent as a printed copy to the "admin-c" contact from your organisation as listed in our membership files. If this is not the correct person to be receiving the Member Update, we ask that you forward the copy to the appropriate contact in your oganisation. We hope that you will find the Member Update a useful way to stay up-to-date with the latest RIPE and RIPE NCC developments, issues and policies. If you have any questions, suggestions or comments about the RIPE NCC Member Update, please contact us by e-mail at: ncc at ripe.net . With best regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director From db-news at ripe.net Wed Apr 23 18:08:00 2003 From: db-news at ripe.net (DB-News) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:08:00 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] Improvements to database update software Message-ID: <200304231608.h3NG80Ss027552@birch.ripe.net> [apologies for duplicate messages] Dear Colleagues, The Database Group at the RIPE NCC has been working on restructuring the dbupdate program. This is the part of the RIPE Whois server that processes update requests from users. The main goal has been to improve the acknowledgement messages that users receive from the RIPE Whois Database and provide clearer error reporting and authorisation information. We have also been able to make the software easier to maintain and modify. This will reduce the time spent fixing bugs and adding new features. Details may be found here: http://www.ripe.net/db/dbupdate/ A page further explaining the new acknowledgements can be found here: http://www.ripe.net/db/dbupdate/acknowledgments.html The new dbupdate messages have a different format. Therefore a phased approach to introducing the new server has been taken. For a period we will use the new dbupdate in parallel with the old one. This will allow people using automated tools time to update their software. PRE-MIGRATION Before the new dbupdate was available. auto-dbm-old at ripe.net DOES NOT EXIST auto-dbm at ripe.net --> old dbupdate auto-dbm-new at ripe.net DOES NOT EXIST DAY-X, Wednesday, 23 April, 2003 The new dbupdate is available but must be requested specifically. auto-dbm-old at ripe.net --> old dbupdate auto-dbm at ripe.net --> old dbupdate auto-dbm-new at ripe.net --> new dbupdate DAY-Y, Wednesday, 7 May, 2003 The new dbupdate is the default but the old dbupdate may be requested specifically. auto-dbm-old at ripe.net --> old dbupdate auto-dbm at ripe.net --> new dbupdate auto-dbm-new at ripe.net --> new dbupdate DAY-Z (POST-MIGRATION), Wednesday, 4 June, 2003 The old dbupdate is no longer available. auto-dbm-old at ripe.net DOES NOT EXIST auto-dbm at ripe.net --> new dbupdate auto-dbm-new at ripe.net DOES NOT EXIST Best regards, -- Shane Kerr Database Group RIPE NCC From shane at ripe.net Fri Apr 25 16:19:12 2003 From: shane at ripe.net (Shane Kerr) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:19:12 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE DB abuse by BSA (of all people) ? In-Reply-To: <003601c302cd$5eb00110$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> References: <003601c302cd$5eb00110$24e0a8c0@HATMADDER> Message-ID: <20030425141910.GH31332@x17.ripe.net> Peter, On 2003-04-14 22:32:36 +0100, Peter Galbavy wrote: > I received this today, could be spam (even if 'genuine') but the > linking of the IP address to me is worrying. I used to be a > registered contact on the IP range mentioned - years ago, so someone > obviously has an old RIPE (or ARIN etc.) DB. > > I know of no other location that this IP range is linked to my > personal details. > > Is this valid / legal use of the RIPE DB (given it is out of date > and obviously an offline copy) ? If it isn't, someone in RIPE want > to pick this up ? Thank you for bringing this up. We will contact the BSA and find out the details of their use of the RIPE Database. At the very least, they are using quite old cached data, and we can help them get more up-to-date records. In general, these kinds of problems may be sent to , unless you wish to discuss them in a public forum. -- Shane Kerr Database Group Manager RIPE NCC From neil at ednet.co.uk Fri Apr 25 16:29:58 2003 From: neil at ednet.co.uk (Neil Anderson Saunders) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:29:58 +0100 (BST) Subject: [lir-wg] RIPE DB abuse by BSA (of all people) ? In-Reply-To: <20030425141910.GH31332@x17.ripe.net> Message-ID: Hi, Actually I would like know what steps the NCC takes in the cases where the Database copyright (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/databaseref-manual.html#A3.1) is breached. Thanks Neil On Fri, 25 Apr 2003, Shane Kerr wrote: > Peter, > > On 2003-04-14 22:32:36 +0100, Peter Galbavy wrote: > > I received this today, could be spam (even if 'genuine') but the > > linking of the IP address to me is worrying. I used to be a > > registered contact on the IP range mentioned - years ago, so someone > > obviously has an old RIPE (or ARIN etc.) DB. > > > > I know of no other location that this IP range is linked to my > > personal details. > > > > Is this valid / legal use of the RIPE DB (given it is out of date > > and obviously an offline copy) ? If it isn't, someone in RIPE want > > to pick this up ? > > Thank you for bringing this up. > > We will contact the BSA and find out the details of their use of the > RIPE Database. At the very least, they are using quite old cached > data, and we can help them get more up-to-date records. > > In general, these kinds of problems may be sent to > , unless you wish to discuss them in a public > forum. > > -- > Shane Kerr > Database Group Manager > RIPE NCC > -- > Virus scanned by edNET. > Kind regards, Neil -- Neil Anderson Saunders edNET t: 0845 1199 900 d: +44 131 514 4019 -- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. Any offers or quotation of service are subject to formal specification. Errors and omissions excepted. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of edNET or lightershade ltd. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. edNET and lightershade ltd accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. -- -- Virus scanned by edNET. From zahid at cxbd.com Thu Apr 17 11:30:20 2003 From: zahid at cxbd.com (Zahid) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 15:30:20 +0600 Subject: [lir-wg] Local Whois Server Message-ID: <000001c30cda$7fded660$fdaf35ca@office> Yucel Guven METU Computer Center, Network Group Dear Yucel Guven, >From your e-mail I came to know that you have setup a local whois server. Would you please let me how we can setup a local whois server. Thanks Zahid System Admin CyberX IT Limited -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bortzmeyer at gitoyen.net Mon Apr 28 10:08:25 2003 From: bortzmeyer at gitoyen.net (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:08:25 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] Local Whois Server In-Reply-To: <000001c30cda$7fded660$fdaf35ca@office> References: <000001c30cda$7fded660$fdaf35ca@office> Message-ID: <20030428080825.GA22700@nic.fr> On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 03:30:20PM +0600, Zahid wrote a message of 53 lines which said: > From your e-mail I came to know that you have setup a local whois > server. Would you please let me how we can setup a local whois server. Writing a whois server, even from scratch, is a matter of one hour (more if you want features such as rate-limiting). Anyway, the whois RIPE server is free software, is already written and is documented. The most difficult thing, by far, is the database itself, the content (the whois server is just a very simple - read RFC 954 - wrapper to publish data.) Can you explain what you want to do? Manage a local copy of the RIPE-NCC database? Why? Manage your own database? From webmaster at ripe.net Tue Apr 29 17:59:55 2003 From: webmaster at ripe.net (RIPE NCC WebMaster) Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:59:55 +0200 Subject: [lir-wg] New Draft Document announcement Message-ID: <200304291559.h3TFxtSs022898@birch.ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC has prepared a draft document titled "Improved Secure Communication System for RIPE NCC Members": http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/pki-20030429.html Abstract There is a need for secure communication between the RIPE NCC and its members. This document presents an overview of the current communication system, and a new approach based on X.509 PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) technology and standards that will make interaction with the services provided by the RIPE NCC to its members more convenient and secure. Finally, the phases necessary to implement the system are described. The idea behind publishing this as a draft document is to give RIPE NCC members time to read it and provide feedback. If the LIRs agree with the ideas presented, then it will become a RIPE document and act as a basis for the project. The draft document can be discussed on the LIR Working Group, , or you can send comments to . Best regards, -- Shane Kerr RIPE NCC