From marcoh at marcoh.net Mon Sep 4 14:44:36 2006 From: marcoh at marcoh.net (Marco Hogewoning) Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 14:44:36 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] ripe mailserver responing 4xx Message-ID: <20060904124436.GA12377@marcoh.net> Just noticed, after I made a typo on an address the RIPE mailserver responds with 4xx temporary error on a non-existing user. Is this deliberate and why not send a 5xx permanen failure. -- aut-dbm at ripe.net SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:: host postboy.ripe.net [193.0.0.201]: 450 : Recipient address rejected: Try again later: retry timeout exceeded -- Grtx, MarcoH From Antoin.Verschuren at sidn.nl Mon Sep 4 14:26:40 2006 From: Antoin.Verschuren at sidn.nl (Antoin Verschuren) Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 14:26:40 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385 Message-ID: Guys, I have some sentimental issues with the new ENUM request forms as I found out when I had to use them last week. The new ENUM registrations ask to register an Organisation holding the registration. This "Organisation" template, has a "org-type:" field. RIPE tells me to fill in "NON-REGISTRY" in this field. I'm aware that we are not an RIR, LIR or NIR as in the RIR world, but I do feel the term "NON-REGISTRY" a bit degrading as we are the registry for .nl and soon hopefully for ENUM. Can we invent a new term to use for official ENUM tier-1 registries here ? Antoin Verschuren Technical Advisor Policy & Business Development SIDN Utrechtseweg 310 PO Box 5022 6802 EA Arnhem The Netherlands T +31 26 3525510 F +31 26 3525505 M +31 6 23368970 E antoin.verschuren at sidn.nl W http://www.sidn.nl/ From katie at ripe.net Wed Sep 6 16:52:17 2006 From: katie at ripe.net (Katie Petrusha) Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 16:52:17 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Re: [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385] In-Reply-To: <44FC216B.4070703@ripe.net> References: <44FC216B.4070703@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20060906145217.GB15517@ripe.net> Dear Antoin, It is certainly possible to add a new organisation object type, like "ENUM", to be specifically used by the ENUM registries. This would involve the changes to the RIPE Database. I suggest you to contact ENUM-WG and DB-WG working group chairs to check first whether this change would require only a mailing list consensus or PDP, and then maybe put together a proposal for ENUM-WG and DB-WG and submit it to the appropriate mailing lists. -- Katie Petrusha RIPE NCC > > From: "Antoin Verschuren" > > Date: 4 September 2006 2:26:40PM GMT+02:00 > > To: > > Cc: > > Subject: [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385 > > Message-Id: > > > > Guys, > > > > I have some sentimental issues with the new ENUM request forms as I > > found out when I had to use them last week. > > > > The new ENUM registrations ask to register an Organisation holding the > > registration. > > > > This "Organisation" template, has a "org-type:" field. > > RIPE tells me to fill in "NON-REGISTRY" in this field. > > > > I'm aware that we are not an RIR, LIR or NIR as in the RIR world, > > but I > > do feel the term "NON-REGISTRY" a bit degrading as we are the registry > > for .nl and soon hopefully for ENUM. > > > > Can we invent a new term to use for official ENUM tier-1 registries > > here > > ? > > > > Antoin Verschuren > > > > Technical Advisor > > Policy & Business Development > > SIDN > > Utrechtseweg 310 > > PO Box 5022 > > 6802 EA Arnhem > > The Netherlands > > > > T +31 26 3525510 > > F +31 26 3525505 > > M +31 6 23368970 > > E antoin.verschuren at sidn.nl > > W http://www.sidn.nl/ From Niall.oReilly at ucd.ie Fri Sep 8 11:13:47 2006 From: Niall.oReilly at ucd.ie (Niall O'Reilly) Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 10:13:47 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Re: [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385] In-Reply-To: <20060906145217.GB15517@ripe.net> References: <44FC216B.4070703@ripe.net> <20060906145217.GB15517@ripe.net> Message-ID: <8AE2BBC2-A72A-4B0A-AABE-4F8AF68AD315@ucd.ie> On 6 Sep 2006, at 15:52, Katie Petrusha wrote: > It is certainly possible to add a new organisation object type, > like "ENUM", to be specifically used by the ENUM registries. > This would involve the changes to the RIPE Database. > > I suggest you to contact ENUM-WG and DB-WG working group chairs > to check first whether this change would require > only a mailing list consensus or PDP, and then maybe put together > a proposal for ENUM-WG and DB-WG and submit it to the appropriate > mailing lists. I'm leaving my wg-co-chair hat off, for now. I'm disappointed that the RIPE-NCC hasn't seen fit to make a more pro-active response in this case. In agreeing to become the ENUM Tier-0 DNS Operator, the RIPE-NCC deliberately (if perhaps implicitly) created a new service and a new category of customer. The RIPE-NCC appears to have assumed (and, if so, quite reasonably) that existing tools and procedures would be adequate to support the (formally, if subtly) different business processes involved in dealing appropriately with customers belonging to this new category. Only recently are some of these customers beginning to need to deal rather formally with the RIPE-NCC. Consequently, they are starting to drive the corresponding business processes. So far, a single trivial, but significant, example has come to light of a mismatch between what is currently possible using existing tools and procedures and what is appropriate in dealing with a customer belonging to this category. This should come as no great surprise; the unexpected will happen in any new activity. It seems to me that having appropriate processes, including appropriate language, in place for dealing with each category of customer is an operational imperative for the RIPE-NCC, and that the RIPE-NCC should take the initiative to deal with any inadequacy in this area. Consider the following parable. The first customer arrives in a new data-centre to rack some equipment, only to find that the air- conditioning plant has not yet been switched on, and brings this to the attention of the escorting data-centre employee. What should the data-centre employee do: reach for the switch, or rather ask the customer to prepare a proposal for agreement among the other interested parties which would provide a policy framework within which the switch could be moved from its existing position? I see this as an operational matter for the ENUM Tier-0 DNS Operator. It's not technical; customer relations are part of operations, too. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly University College Dublin Computing Services PGP key ID: AE995ED9 (see www.pgp.net) Fingerprint: 23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9 From andrei at ripe.net Fri Sep 8 13:57:56 2006 From: andrei at ripe.net (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 13:57:56 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Re: [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385] In-Reply-To: <8AE2BBC2-A72A-4B0A-AABE-4F8AF68AD315@ucd.ie> References: <44FC216B.4070703@ripe.net> <20060906145217.GB15517@ripe.net> <8AE2BBC2-A72A-4B0A-AABE-4F8AF68AD315@ucd.ie> Message-ID: <45015AC4.9070902@ripe.net> Dear Niall, Antoin, Niall O'Reilly wrote: > > On 6 Sep 2006, at 15:52, Katie Petrusha wrote: > >> It is certainly possible to add a new organisation object type, >> like "ENUM", to be specifically used by the ENUM registries. >> This would involve the changes to the RIPE Database. >> >> I suggest you to contact ENUM-WG and DB-WG working group chairs >> to check first whether this change would require >> only a mailing list consensus or PDP, and then maybe put together >> a proposal for ENUM-WG and DB-WG and submit it to the appropriate >> mailing lists. > > I'm leaving my wg-co-chair hat off, for now. > > I'm disappointed that the RIPE-NCC hasn't seen fit to make a more > pro-active response in this case. > > In agreeing to become the ENUM Tier-0 DNS Operator, the RIPE-NCC > deliberately (if perhaps implicitly) created a new service and a > new category of customer. The RIPE-NCC appears to have assumed > (and, if so, quite reasonably) that existing tools and procedures > would be adequate to support the (formally, if subtly) different > business processes involved in dealing appropriately with customers > belonging to this new category. > > Only recently are some of these customers beginning to need to deal > rather formally with the RIPE-NCC. Consequently, they are starting > to drive the corresponding business processes. So far, a single > trivial, but significant, example has come to light of a mismatch > between what is currently possible using existing tools and procedures > and what is appropriate in dealing with a customer belonging to this > category. This should come as no great surprise; the unexpected will > happen in any new activity. > > It seems to me that having appropriate processes, including appropriate > language, in place for dealing with each category of customer is an > operational imperative for the RIPE-NCC, and that the RIPE-NCC should > take the initiative to deal with any inadequacy in this area. > Thank you very much for your feedback and the valid points you brought up. I think we simply were not sure what would be the best way to have such discussion and to better understand the requirements, which may clarify or exceed a simple request for a new org type. That's why we suggested to ask wg-chairs for advice. You are right in saying that we should have been more proactive in asking this advice or preparing a proposal ourselves, which we can certainly do based on yours and probably upcoming feedback. > Consider the following parable. The first customer arrives in a new > data-centre to rack some equipment, only to find that the air-conditioning > plant has not yet been switched on, and brings this to the attention > of the escorting data-centre employee. What should the data-centre > employee do: reach for the switch, or rather ask the customer to prepare > a proposal for agreement among the other interested parties which would > provide a policy framework within which the switch could be moved from > its existing position? > > I see this as an operational matter for the ENUM Tier-0 DNS Operator. > It's not technical; customer relations are part of operations, too. > Yes, but in the case of the RIPE Database we'd rather err to be more formal because of high visibility of changes and dependencies. > > > > Best regards, > > Niall O'Reilly > University College Dublin Computing Services > > PGP key ID: AE995ED9 (see www.pgp.net) > Fingerprint: 23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9 > > > Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC From md at Linux.IT Fri Sep 8 14:50:28 2006 From: md at Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri) Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 14:50:28 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Re: [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385] In-Reply-To: <45015AC4.9070902@ripe.net> References: <44FC216B.4070703@ripe.net> <20060906145217.GB15517@ripe.net> <8AE2BBC2-A72A-4B0A-AABE-4F8AF68AD315@ucd.ie> <45015AC4.9070902@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20060908125028.GA8527@wonderland.linux.it> On Sep 08, Andrei Robachevsky wrote: > Yes, but in the case of the RIPE Database we'd rather err to be more > formal because of high visibility of changes and dependencies. I agree, thank you for bringing this issue to the appropriate WG. FWIW, I really cannot see a valid reason for such a change. It should be obvious that in the context of org-type attributes the words "NON-REGISTRY" have a specific meaning, which does not need to be the same (and cannot be the same!) of the semantic of the word "registry" in every other possible context. I would appreciate if RIPE NCC would not waste resources implementing and documenting new attribute values for every tiny group that feels to not be described in a sufficiently excruciating level of detail by the available choices. But maybe it's just me, and Mr. Verschuren should explain more clearly why he believes that the status of his organization as an ENUM registry should be relevant in the context of org-type attributes, possibly without resorting to "sentimental issues". -- ciao, Marco -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From marcin at ripe.net Tue Sep 12 16:30:13 2006 From: marcin at ripe.net (Marcin Deranek) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:30:13 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] ripe mailserver responing 4xx In-Reply-To: <20060904124436.GA12377@marcoh.net> References: <20060904124436.GA12377@marcoh.net> Message-ID: <4506C475.7010209@ripe.net> Hi Marco, Marco Hogewoning wrote: > Just noticed, after I made a typo on an address the RIPE mailserver > responds with 4xx temporary error on a non-existing user. Is this > deliberate and why not send a 5xx permanen failure. That has been fixed and server should respond with 5xx error code from now on. This is a leftover from time when we were changing mail server policy and did not want to reject legitimate by accident, but rather make sure things are working as intended... Regards, Marcin Deranek -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From BSanghani at flagtelecom.com Mon Sep 25 14:31:18 2006 From: BSanghani at flagtelecom.com (Sanghani, Bijal) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 13:31:18 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] RIPE 53 - NCC Services WG - Draft Agenda Message-ID: <147955311569D511AD0D00508B66753004954B28@lon-emailcl.flagtelecom.com> Dear All, Please see below Draft Agenda for RIPE 53. Regards, Bijal === A. Administrative Matters (5 min) - Welcome - Select a scribe - Distribute participants list - Finalise agenda - Approve minutes from RIPE 52 B. RIPE NCC Update, Vision and Focus 2007: Proposed Changes to Activities in 2007 - Axel Pawlik, RIPE NCC 25 minutes C. Training Services Update - Rumy Kanis, RIPE NCC 15 minutes D. Open Mic Z. AOB ********************************************************************** This e-mail message is confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and contains information which is or may be confidential, non-public or legally privileged. Any dissemination or distribution of this message other than to its intended recipient is strictly prohibited. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose the contents to any other person. If you have received this message in error, please notify us by email to postmaster at flagtelecom.com immediately and delete the original message and all copies from all locations in your computer systems. This e-mail has been swept by Mailsweeper TM for viruses. However, FLAG Telecom cannot accept liability for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses. ********************************************************************** This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl - www.mailcontrol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From leo at ripe.net Tue Sep 26 10:59:57 2006 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:59:57 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2005-02 implementation: IP assignments for anycasting DNS Message-ID: <271D7BC3-CF74-4877-A993-5918714DD514@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that we will be able to accept e-mailed requests for assignments for anycasting DNS servers from 2 October 2006. The request form and supporting notes will be available from the RIPE Document Store at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/internet-registries.html We will make a separate announcement when it is possible to make requests via the LIR Portal. Assignments for anycasting DNS will come from reserved blocks: * IPv4 Anycast Assignments (/24) from 194.0.0.0/18 * IPv6 Anycast Assignments (/48) from 2001:0678::/29 You may want to update your filters. Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From leo at ripe.net Tue Sep 26 10:59:57 2006 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:59:57 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [ncc-announce] 2005-02 implementation: IP assignments for anycasting DNS Message-ID: <271D7BC3-CF74-4877-A993-5918714DD514@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that we will be able to accept e-mailed requests for assignments for anycasting DNS servers from 2 October 2006. The request form and supporting notes will be available from the RIPE Document Store at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/internet-registries.html We will make a separate announcement when it is possible to make requests via the LIR Portal. Assignments for anycasting DNS will come from reserved blocks: * IPv4 Anycast Assignments (/24) from 194.0.0.0/18 * IPv6 Anycast Assignments (/48) from 2001:0678::/29 You may want to update your filters. Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From leo at ripe.net Tue Sep 26 10:59:57 2006 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:59:57 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [ncc-co@ripe.net] [ncc-announce] 2005-02 implementation: IP assignments for anycasting DNS Message-ID: <271D7BC3-CF74-4877-A993-5918714DD514@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that we will be able to accept e-mailed requests for assignments for anycasting DNS servers from 2 October 2006. The request form and supporting notes will be available from the RIPE Document Store at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/internet-registries.html We will make a separate announcement when it is possible to make requests via the LIR Portal. Assignments for anycasting DNS will come from reserved blocks: * IPv4 Anycast Assignments (/24) from 194.0.0.0/18 * IPv6 Anycast Assignments (/48) from 2001:0678::/29 You may want to update your filters. Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From nigel.titley at uk.easynet.net Thu Sep 28 15:12:41 2006 From: nigel.titley at uk.easynet.net (Nigel Titley) Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 14:12:41 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] object-type: poem? Message-ID: <5662A9E6AB05AB4DBB36534F9238AD7B573E77@exch2-bllon.uk.easynet.corp> > On 16.08 00:29, Tiberiu Ungureanu wrote: > > while looking for something else, i tripped and fell over this: > > > > $ whois -t poem > > > > poem: [mandatory] [single] [primary/look-up key] > > descr: [optional] [multiple] [ ] > > form: [mandatory] [single] [inverse key] > > text: [mandatory] [multiple] [ ] > > admin-c: [mandatory] [multiple] [inverse key] > > author: [mandatory] [multiple] [inverse key] > > remarks: [optional] [multiple] [ ] > > notify: [optional] [multiple] [inverse key] > > mnt-by: [mandatory] [multiple] [inverse key] > > changed: [mandatory] [multiple] [ ] > > source: [mandatory] [single] [ ] > > > > should i take it that RIPE database allow the creative ones to store > > their own poems (as in... poetry?). can anyone point me to > the document > > explaining this object ? > > This object supports activities of "The Secret Working Group", > a long standing tradition at RIPE meetings. > > See http://www.ripe.net/db/news/poem-object-200505.html > for the latest developments concerning this object. But which is slightly out of date. See my (forthcoming) presentation at the RIPE 53 DB-WG session. Nigel From leo at ripe.net Tue Sep 26 10:59:57 2006 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:59:57 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [ncc-co@ripe.net] [ncc-announce] 2005-02 implementation: IP assignments for anycasting DNS Message-ID: <271D7BC3-CF74-4877-A993-5918714DD514@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that we will be able to accept e-mailed requests for assignments for anycasting DNS servers from 2 October 2006. The request form and supporting notes will be available from the RIPE Document Store at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/internet-registries.html We will make a separate announcement when it is possible to make requests via the LIR Portal. Assignments for anycasting DNS will come from reserved blocks: * IPv4 Anycast Assignments (/24) from 194.0.0.0/18 * IPv6 Anycast Assignments (/48) from 2001:0678::/29 You may want to update your filters. Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC