From ncc at ripe.net Wed May 6 11:23:35 2009 From: ncc at ripe.net (Scott Donald) Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 11:23:35 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] RIPE NCC Now Accepting Requests for IPv6 PI Assignments Message-ID: <4A015717.2000906@ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicate emails.] Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that the RIPE NCC now accept requests for IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) assignments. This follows the accepted policy proposal 2006-01 "Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations". The request form and supporting notes are available from the RIPE Document Store at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6.html Requests can also be made via the LIR Portal, which is available at: https://lirportal.ripe.net/ IPv6 PI assignments will come from reserved block 2001:678::/29. You may want to update your filters. Regards, Scott Donald Registration Services RIPE NCC From president at ukraine.su Fri May 15 14:46:21 2009 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 15:46:21 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Charging scheme 2010 Message-ID: <4A0D641D.3030802@ukraine.su> Hi all, is there a good place to discuss 2010 charging scheme? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From rumy at ripe.net Mon May 18 16:27:27 2009 From: rumy at ripe.net (Rumy Kanis) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 16:27:27 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Announcement: DNSSEC e-learning module 1 available now Message-ID: [apologies for duplicates] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC is pleased to announce the launch of the first module of our DNSSEC e-learning course, entitled "DNS Basics". This introductory module explains how DNS works by following a simple query, and can be viewed at: https://e-learning.ripe.net/training/e-learning/ In the coming months we will be releasing several more modules. Next up are: Module 2: DNS Vulnerabilities Module 3: DNSSEC The RIPE NCC E-Learning Centre is a free-of-charge service available to everyone. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at . Happy Learning, Rumy Kanis Training Services Manager RIPE NCC -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 1728 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ncc at ripe.net Wed May 20 14:33:15 2009 From: ncc at ripe.net (Paul Rendek) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 14:33:15 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Website Launch: www.IPv6ActNow.org Message-ID: <4A13F88B.7010303@ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicate emails.] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC is pleased to announce the launch of the IPv6 Act Now! website. www.IPv6ActNow.org is a one stop website that explains IPv6 in terms that everyone can understand and provides a variety of useful information aimed at promoting the global adoption of IPv6. The site is for anyone with an interest in IPv6, including network engineers, company directors, law enforcement agencies, government representatives and civil society. The site content is regularly updated and includes: - Education, advice and opinions from the experts - Latest IPv6-related news stories - Videos and articles from Internet community leaders - Current IPv4 exhaustion and IPv6 uptake statistics - The RIPE community's statement on IPv6 deployment, including a list of organisations supporting this statement - Information on community-developed IPv6 distribution policies - Useful links to other sources of information about IPv6 - A forum for everyone to share experiences, ask questions and find answers The site also includes contributions from other Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and industry partners. We invite you to take a look around the site. We hope that you find it useful. If you have and comments or suggestions about IPv6ActNow!, please contact us at . Regards, Paul Rendek Head of External Relations and Communication RIPE NCC From denis at ripe.net Wed May 27 19:08:55 2009 From: denis at ripe.net (Denis Walker) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 19:08:55 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] rev-srv: Attribute Deprecation: Stage 2 completed Message-ID: <4A1D73A7.5040102@ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC has begun implementing the deprecation of the "rev-srv:" attribute. This was discussed on the DNS WG mailing list and at the RIPE 54 Meeting in Tallinn, Estonia, during the Database Working Group session. More details are available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/dns-wg/2007/msg00090.html The plan suggested on the mailing list is being used and there are three stages: - Stage 1: Announcement - Stage 2: Syntax change - Stage 3: Clean-up The announcement was made to the Database Working Group mailing list on 27 April 2009. *Stage 2 has now been completed.* The RIPE NCC has removed the "rev-srv:" attribute from the RIPE RPSL syntax for INET(6)NUM objects. Any new objects created must not have this attribute included. If any objects that include this attribute are modified, then the "rev-srv:" attributes must be removed. If you wish to keep the information for documentation purposes, change the"rev-srv:" attributes into "remarks:" attributes. The "rev-srv:" attribute has also been removed from the list of inverse query options. Stage 3 is planned to be completed before RIPE 59. A further announcement will be made before the cleanup is performed. If you have any questions about this, please contact ripe-dbm at ripe.net. Regards, Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC From andrea at ripe.net Thu May 28 14:28:50 2009 From: andrea at ripe.net (Andrea Cima) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 14:28:50 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC Message-ID: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, We are pleased to announce that the RIPE NCC has implemented the second phase of "Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC". In this phase the RIPE NCC will contact all LIRs to request information regarding existing direct resources requested through that LIR. This will be done via the LIR Portal. All LIR Portal users will receive a notification email on 28 May 2009 detailing the process. Details of the implementation are available at: http://www.ripe.net/rs/pi-existing-assignments.html Timelines: Before September 2009: LIRs need to indicate which resources should stay with that LIR. This will affect the charging scheme for 2010. Before 31 December 2009: LIRs must upload contracts and registration papers for all resources still associated with that LIR. More information on the requirements of the contractual agreement can be found here: http://www.ripe.net/membership/lir-end-user-requirements.html Kind regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC From president at ukraine.su Thu May 28 20:09:37 2009 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 21:09:37 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> Message-ID: <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> Andrea, the working day of 28th of May was just finished, but I don't get any e-mail ;) Really, there are two questions still open: 1. If some net is our customer, have the agreement with us, but was NOT registered with our LIR - what we should do? 2. The contract should include annual payments, and in good case we should put the actual sum inside the contract (instead of "please sign here you should pay wedontknowhowmuch later). The LIR billing scheme or even all the scheme candidates (I have to keep in mind the worst one for me when I deal with my users, of course) will appear later than we have to upload contracts. P.S. Will end users receive the notification directly from RIPE NCC "OK, we now have approved your contract, you can sleep relaxed" after the contract have been approved? I think it is a very very good idea. Andrea Cima wrote: > [Apologies for duplicates] > > Dear colleagues, > > We are pleased to announce that the RIPE NCC has implemented the second > phase of "Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the > RIPE NCC". > > In this phase the RIPE NCC will contact all LIRs to request information > regarding existing direct resources requested through that LIR. This will > be done via the LIR Portal. All LIR Portal users will receive a > notification email on 28 May 2009 detailing the process. > > Details of the implementation are available at: > http://www.ripe.net/rs/pi-existing-assignments.html > > Timelines: > > Before September 2009: LIRs need to indicate which resources should stay > with that LIR. This will affect the charging scheme for 2010. > > Before 31 December 2009: LIRs must upload contracts and registration > papers for all resources still associated with that LIR. > > More information on the requirements of the contractual agreement can be > found here: > http://www.ripe.net/membership/lir-end-user-requirements.html > > Kind regards, > > Andrea Cima > RIPE NCC > > > -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 28 21:35:00 2009 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 21:35:00 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> Message-ID: Hi Max, > 1. If some net is our customer, have the agreement with us, but was > NOT registered with our LIR - what we should do? That should not be a problem. The end user needs to have a contract with an LIR. It does not really matter which LIR it is, and the user can move between LIRs if they want. They have a provider independent resource after all :) > 2. The contract should include annual payments, and in good case we > should put the actual sum inside the contract (instead of "please sign > here you should pay wedontknowhowmuch later). The LIR billing scheme > or > even all the scheme candidates (I have to keep in mind the worst one > for > me when I deal with my users, of course) will appear later than we > have > to upload contracts. A good idea would be to leave the exact amount out of the contract and specify that the fee depends on the fee the RIPE NCC charges you. That way you won't get into trouble when the fees change later. - Sander From president at ukraine.su Thu May 28 22:32:47 2009 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 23:32:47 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> Sander Steffann wrote: >> 1. If some net is our customer, have the agreement with us, but was >> NOT registered with our LIR - what we should do? > > That should not be a problem. The end user needs to have a contract with > an LIR. It does not really matter which LIR it is, and the user can move > between LIRs if they want. They have a provider independent resource > after all :) Sure. But I ask for the procedure. Whom send the contract to? There is nothing about it in the current version of the LIR Portal. >> 2. The contract should include annual payments, and in good case we >> should put the actual sum inside the contract (instead of "please sign >> here you should pay wedontknowhowmuch later). The LIR billing scheme or >> even all the scheme candidates (I have to keep in mind the worst one for >> me when I deal with my users, of course) will appear later than we have >> to upload contracts. > > A good idea would be to leave the exact amount out of the contract and > specify that the fee depends on the fee the RIPE NCC charges you. That > way you won't get into trouble when the fees change later. It is a VERY BAD idea. None of healthly minded financial people sign that ;) -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From sander at steffann.nl Thu May 28 23:59:24 2009 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 23:59:24 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> Hi Max, >> A good idea would be to leave the exact amount out of the contract >> and >> specify that the fee depends on the fee the RIPE NCC charges you. >> That >> way you won't get into trouble when the fees change later. > > It is a VERY BAD idea. None of healthly minded financial people sign > that ;) Why? You get charged for the resources that those end users have. It is not strange to charge them for that amount. There is no way for them to keep those resources without paying the amount set in the charging scheme by the RIPE NCC General Meeting. The same as an LIR who has to pay the RIPE NCC membership fees set in the same charging scheme. You as an LIR have signed a contract with the NCC without knowing the exact amount that you will be charged next year. Why would an end user be any different? Something like "The yearly fee for Provider Independent resources is determined by the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme. We will send you a bill for the amount specified in that Charging Scheme". Your lawyers should be able to put that in some acceptable language for in a contract :) - Sander From president at ukraine.su Fri May 29 00:42:45 2009 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 01:42:45 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> Message-ID: <4A1F1365.2040305@ukraine.su> Hi Sander, this is a bad idea because of right now it is unpredictable at all. How much it will cost? 1 EUR? 10? 50? 100? 500? 1000? 1000000? There is a maximum payment a company can carry for their PI/AS. If the payment will be higher - they can't, and will have to return their objects. This sum is different for different companies. And if I offer NNN EUR - one said "no, thanks". If I can't even say how much payment can be - they scare, don't sign anything and at least will wait for charging scheme, making actualisation process much harder for RIPE NCC. The worst case if some of LIRs will take risks and charge users for for example 50 EUR, and then after got a bill with 100 EUR per user, went out of business in 1st quarter of 2010. Their customers will have to find out a new LIR, pay again for same year, and say, fairly, "what the f&&#%^#-heads sitting in this, hmmm, RIPE NCC!!!". P.S. When I became a LIR, I saw that yearly payment for ten years is ABOUT 1200 EUR. It doesn't really matter will it be 1108 or 1345 from year to year. But it really matter is it 1200 or 12000 or 120000. Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi Max, > >>> A good idea would be to leave the exact amount out of the contract and >>> specify that the fee depends on the fee the RIPE NCC charges you. That >>> way you won't get into trouble when the fees change later. >> >> It is a VERY BAD idea. None of healthly minded financial people sign >> that ;) > > Why? You get charged for the resources that those end users have. It is > not strange to charge them for that amount. There is no way for them to > keep those resources without paying the amount set in the charging > scheme by the RIPE NCC General Meeting. The same as an LIR who has to > pay the RIPE NCC membership fees set in the same charging scheme. You as > an LIR have signed a contract with the NCC without knowing the exact > amount that you will be charged next year. Why would an end user be any > different? > > Something like "The yearly fee for Provider Independent resources is > determined by the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme. We will send you a bill for > the amount specified in that Charging Scheme". Your lawyers should be > able to put that in some acceptable language for in a contract :) > > - Sander > -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From sergey at devnull.ru Fri May 29 08:13:23 2009 From: sergey at devnull.ru (Sergey Myasoedov) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 08:13:23 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <4A1F1365.2040305@ukraine.su> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> <4A1F1365.2040305@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <1832521376.20090529081323@devnull.ru> Max, you can charge your customers without any profit. This will be fair and clear. They will pay exactly the amount was described in charging scheme and was approved by the GM. But you want to have a profit. So you will have some risks. Relax, this situation is usual. Friday, May 29, 2009, 12:42:45 AM, you wrote: MT> Hi Sander, MT> this is a bad idea because of right now it is unpredictable at all. How MT> much it will cost? 1 EUR? 10? 50? 100? 500? 1000? 1000000? There is a MT> maximum payment a company can carry for their PI/AS. If the payment will MT> be higher - they can't, and will have to return their objects. This sum MT> is different for different companies. And if I offer NNN EUR - one said MT> "no, thanks". If I can't even say how much payment can be - they scare, MT> don't sign anything and at least will wait for charging scheme, making MT> actualisation process much harder for RIPE NCC. MT> The worst case if some of LIRs will take risks and charge users for for MT> example 50 EUR, and then after got a bill with 100 EUR per user, went MT> out of business in 1st quarter of 2010. Their customers will have to MT> find out a new LIR, pay again for same year, and say, fairly, "what the MT> f&&#%^#-heads sitting in this, hmmm, RIPE NCC!!!". MT> P.S. When I became a LIR, I saw that yearly payment for ten years is MT> ABOUT 1200 EUR. It doesn't really matter will it be 1108 or 1345 from MT> year to year. But it really matter is it 1200 or 12000 or 120000. MT> Sander Steffann wrote: >> Hi Max, >> >>>> A good idea would be to leave the exact amount out of the contract and >>>> specify that the fee depends on the fee the RIPE NCC charges you. That >>>> way you won't get into trouble when the fees change later. >>> >>> It is a VERY BAD idea. None of healthly minded financial people sign >>> that ;) >> >> Why? You get charged for the resources that those end users have. It is >> not strange to charge them for that amount. There is no way for them to >> keep those resources without paying the amount set in the charging >> scheme by the RIPE NCC General Meeting. The same as an LIR who has to >> pay the RIPE NCC membership fees set in the same charging scheme. You as >> an LIR have signed a contract with the NCC without knowing the exact >> amount that you will be charged next year. Why would an end user be any >> different? >> >> Something like "The yearly fee for Provider Independent resources is >> determined by the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme. We will send you a bill for >> the amount specified in that Charging Scheme". Your lawyers should be >> able to put that in some acceptable language for in a contract :) >> >> - Sander >> -- Sergey From president at ukraine.su Fri May 29 11:45:44 2009 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 12:45:44 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <1832521376.20090529081323@devnull.ru> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> <4A1F1365.2040305@ukraine.su> <1832521376.20090529081323@devnull.ru> Message-ID: <4A1FAEC8.3080404@ukraine.su> Sergey, it not depends on want I to earn some money or not want. It is about will all the scheme survive or not. Anyway, I can write in contract "the sum from RIPE NCC billing scheme added NN percent for LIR service" - and the question is I can't explain users how much they will pay, even approximately. Even in that case, some of billing scheme candidates don't have clear price for each object. Sergey Myasoedov wrote: > Max, > > you can charge your customers without any profit. This will be fair and clear. They will > pay exactly the amount was described in charging scheme and was approved by the GM. > But you want to have a profit. So you will have some risks. Relax, this situation is > usual. > -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From andrea at ripe.net Fri May 29 15:50:58 2009 From: andrea at ripe.net (Andrea Cima) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 15:50:58 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <4A1FE842.2030006@ripe.net> Dear Max, Max Tulyev wrote: > 1. If some net is our customer, have the agreement with us, but was NOT > registered with our LIR - what we should do? > > Phase 2 of the policy implementation 'Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC' focuses on the independent resources assigned through your LIR only. Even though not directly related to this policy implementation, we are finalising a procedural RIPE document which outlines the steps to be taken in the case you mention above. > 2. The contract should include annual payments, and in good case we > should put the actual sum inside the contract (instead of "please sign > here you should pay wedontknowhowmuch later). The LIR billing scheme or > even all the scheme candidates (I have to keep in mind the worst one for > me when I deal with my users, of course) will appear later than we have > to upload contracts. > > Contracts can be uploaded until 31 December 2009. With regards to the Charging Scheme, the Charing Scheme 2010 is decided upon in the autumn General Meeting which takes place in conjunction with the RIPE 59 at the beginning of October. The draft document is published 4 weeks in advance of this meeting. > P.S. Will end users receive the notification directly from RIPE NCC "OK, > we now have approved your contract, you can sleep relaxed" after the > contract have been approved? I think it is a very very good idea. > > We intentionally decided not to do this. The communication channel between the End User of an LIR and the RIPE NCC, is the Sponsoring LIR which the End User signs the contract with. I hope this clarifies. If not, don't hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC > Andrea Cima wrote: > >> [Apologies for duplicates] >> >> Dear colleagues, >> >> We are pleased to announce that the RIPE NCC has implemented the second >> phase of "Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the >> RIPE NCC". >> >> In this phase the RIPE NCC will contact all LIRs to request information >> regarding existing direct resources requested through that LIR. This will >> be done via the LIR Portal. All LIR Portal users will receive a >> notification email on 28 May 2009 detailing the process. >> >> Details of the implementation are available at: >> http://www.ripe.net/rs/pi-existing-assignments.html >> >> Timelines: >> >> Before September 2009: LIRs need to indicate which resources should stay >> with that LIR. This will affect the charging scheme for 2010. >> >> Before 31 December 2009: LIRs must upload contracts and registration >> papers for all resources still associated with that LIR. >> >> More information on the requirements of the contractual agreement can be >> found here: >> http://www.ripe.net/membership/lir-end-user-requirements.html >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Andrea Cima >> RIPE NCC >> >> >> >> > > > From hank at efes.iucc.ac.il Sat May 30 20:41:16 2009 From: hank at efes.iucc.ac.il (Hank Nussbacher) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 21:41:16 +0300 (IDT) Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2007-01 Phase 2 Implementation: Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> References: <4A1E8382.3010006@ripe.net> <4A1ED361.7020608@ukraine.su> <4A1EF4EF.8070403@ukraine.su> <34F2C670-5C8A-4BCB-8076-7D44CD67A1DB@steffann.nl> Message-ID: On Thu, 28 May 2009, Sander Steffann wrote: > Why? You get charged for the resources that those end users have. It is not > strange to charge them for that amount. There is no way for them to keep > those resources without paying the amount set in the charging scheme by the > RIPE NCC General Meeting. The same as an LIR who has to pay the RIPE NCC > membership fees set in the same charging scheme. You as an LIR have signed a > contract with the NCC without knowing the exact amount that you will be > charged next year. Why would an end user be any different? When we allocated ASNs (just an ASN - not PI space) to some organizations 13 years ago we did not assume that RIPE would start charging per ASN allocation *and* retroactively as well. May not be legally valid from an EU standpoint, but we do not have the resources to contest it. So we just eat the cost. -Hank