From mschmidt at ripe.net Mon Sep 2 15:39:43 2013 From: mschmidt at ripe.net (Marco Schmidt) Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:39:43 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The Review Period for the proposal 2012-08, "Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources", has been extended until 1 October 2013. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments to . Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Development Office RIPE NCC From mschmidt at ripe.net Tue Sep 3 15:10:24 2013 From: mschmidt at ripe.net (Marco Schmidt) Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:10:24 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2013-04 Last Call for Comments (Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members) Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The proposal described in 2013-04, Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members, is now in its Concluding Phase. The RIPE NCC Services Working Group co-Chairs have declared that consensus for the proposal has been reached and it will now move to Last Call. As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of these coming four weeks of Last Call is to give the community the opportunity to present well-justified objections in case anyone missed the previous two phases and want to oppose the proposal. Any objection must be made by 2 October 2013 and must be supported by an explanation. If no substantive objections are raised by the end of Last Call, the proposal will complete the PDP and will be evaluated by the co-Chairs of all RIPE Working Groups for consensus. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-04 Please e-mail any final comments about this proposal to ncc-services-wg at ripe.net before 2 October 2013. Regards Marco Schmidt Policy Development Office RIPE NCC From ripencc-management at ripe.net Wed Sep 4 14:22:43 2013 From: ripencc-management at ripe.net (Jochem de Ruig) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 14:22:43 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Netnod Selected to Host RIPE NCC "Warm Node" References: <409B411A-476D-4003-8924-E37EFF7729B2@ripe.net> Message-ID: <392C32B8-6F60-4B87-9642-AF80B1C1FD1E@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, On 1 July 2013, the RIPE NCC issued a call for organisations willing to host a "warm node" able operate some of the RIPE NCC's critical services in case of a major disaster in the Amsterdam area. In response, we received expressions of interest from 88 organisations, of which 22 submitted a full Request for Proposal (RFP). Various factors were taken into account in reaching a decision, including the legal and political situation in the country of hosting provider, the host organisation's facilities, connectivity and support services, and the specific terms and conditions of the contract (including pricing). The RIPE NCC has decided to establish this "warm node" with Netnod AS in Stockholm, Sweden. Netnod was selected for several reasons including their connectivity, security, geographic location and reputation. We would like to thank all those organisations that offered their services. Kind regards, Jochem De Ruig Chief Financial Officer, RIPE NCC From denis at ripe.net Mon Sep 9 15:27:50 2013 From: denis at ripe.net (Denis Walker) Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 15:27:50 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] RIPE Database Release 1.69 Available Soon Message-ID: <522DCCD6.9060205@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC is pleased to announce that we have deployed a new release of the RIPE Database to the TEST Database environment. Detailed information about the new release, including dates and information about the changes can be found here: https://www.ripe.net/data-tools/db/release-notes/ripe-database-release-1.69 Of special note in this release is the inclusion of "dry-run". Using the dry-run function you can test whether an update would succeed or not. The update procedure runs as normal except that no change is made to the database. Find out more about the dry-run function here: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/denis/dry-run-testing-in-the-ripe-database Due to recent issues with the REST API, we've extended the migration period up until the 1.70 release. This release is currently scheduled for the end of October. If you have any questions or comments, we look forward to hearing them! Regards, Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Team From bijal.sanghani at euro-ix.net Mon Sep 9 18:08:12 2013 From: bijal.sanghani at euro-ix.net (Bijal Sanghani) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 17:08:12 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Call for Agenda Items RIPE67 -RIPE NCC Services WG Message-ID: <13BCBB16-55DB-4F58-9ABF-A21BDCC2663E@euro-ix.net> Dear NCC-Services WG, RIPE67 is just round the corner and we are putting the agenda together for the NCC Services WG. This is your opportunity to let the RIPE NCC know what you want from them, if you would like to suggest a topic for discussion or have a presentation you have or would like to see presented please get in touch with the working group chairs at ncc-services-wg-chairs at ripe.net. Best regards, Bijal Sanghani RIPE NCC Services WG Co-Chair From bijal.sanghani at euro-ix.net Mon Sep 9 19:53:46 2013 From: bijal.sanghani at euro-ix.net (Bijal Sanghani) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 18:53:46 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> Message-ID: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Dear All, As per the below mail, the NCC Services working group chairs decided to extend the review period for 2012-08 until the 1st of October. It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. Please take a few minutes (it's not a lot to read) and let us know your thoughts so that we can move to the next steps once the review period has ended. Many thanks, Bijal and Kurtis NCC Service WG Chairs On 2 Sep 2013, at 14:39, Marco Schmidt wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > > The Review Period for the proposal 2012-08, "Publication of Sponsoring LIR > for Independent Number Resources", has been extended until 1 October 2013. > > > You can find the full proposal at: > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 > > > We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments > to . > > Regards, > > Marco Schmidt > Policy Development Office > RIPE NCC > > From niall.oreilly at ucd.ie Tue Sep 10 10:19:06 2013 From: niall.oreilly at ucd.ie (Niall O'Reilly) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 09:19:06 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: On 9 Sep 2013, at 18:53, Bijal Sanghani wrote: > It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. Although I've been silent throughout the current Review Period, I'm still in favour of this proposal. /Niall From lists-ripe at c4inet.net Tue Sep 10 12:31:24 2013 From: lists-ripe at c4inet.net (Sascha Luck) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 11:31:24 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: <20130910103124.GA84155@cilantro.c4inet.net> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 09:19:06AM +0100, Niall O'Reilly wrote: > Although I've been silent throughout the current Review Period, > I'm still in favour of this proposal. and I'm still opposed, for what that is worth. rgds, Sascha Luck From ebais at a2b-internet.com Tue Sep 10 13:41:07 2013 From: ebais at a2b-internet.com (Erik Bais) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:41:07 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> > You can find the full proposal at: > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 As stated before I still oppose to this policy. Registration of PI space by a sponsoring LIR is an administrative task and doesn't have anything to do with abuse management. I foresee that publication of the sponsoring LIR will be abused for abuse messaging and relaying, while there is no network / operational relation between the end-user and the LIR. Regards, Erik Bais From elvis at velea.eu Tue Sep 10 13:42:44 2013 From: elvis at velea.eu (Elvis Velea) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:42:44 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> Message-ID: <522F05B4.3020305@velea.eu> Hi, On 9/10/13 1:41 PM, Erik Bais wrote: >> You can find the full proposal at: >> >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 > > As stated before I still oppose to this policy. > > Registration of PI space by a sponsoring LIR is an administrative task and > doesn't have anything to do with abuse management. > I foresee that publication of the sponsoring LIR will be abused for abuse > messaging and relaying, while there is no network / operational relation > between the end-user and the LIR. > +1 -- Kind regards, Elvis Velea From Jerzy.Pawlus at cyf-kr.edu.pl Tue Sep 10 13:59:17 2013 From: Jerzy.Pawlus at cyf-kr.edu.pl (Jerzy Pawlus) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:59:17 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <522F05B4.3020305@velea.eu> (message from Elvis Velea on Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:42:44 +0200) References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> <522F05B4.3020305@velea.eu> Message-ID: <86sixcevl6.fsf@nc.cyf-kr.edu.pl> Hi, On 9/10/13 1:41 PM, Erik Bais wrote: >> You can find the full proposal at: >> >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 > > As stated before I still oppose to this policy. > > Registration of PI space by a sponsoring LIR is an administrative task and > doesn't have anything to do with abuse management. > I foresee that publication of the sponsoring LIR will be abused for abuse > messaging and relaying, while there is no network / operational relation > between the end-user and the LIR. > +1 -- Kind regards, Jerzy Pawlus From bengan at resilans.se Tue Sep 10 14:56:20 2013 From: bengan at resilans.se (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bengt_G=F6rd=E9n?=) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 14:56:20 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> 2013-09-10 10:19, Niall O'Reilly skrev: > On 9 Sep 2013, at 18:53, Bijal Sanghani wrote: > >> It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. > Although I've been silent throughout the current Review Period, > I'm still in favour of this proposal. I'm in favour of the this proposal. -- Bengt G?rd?n Resilans AB From stolpe at resilans.se Tue Sep 10 15:34:09 2013 From: stolpe at resilans.se (Daniel Stolpe) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:34:09 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Bengt G?rd?n wrote: > 2013-09-10 10:19, Niall O'Reilly skrev: >> On 9 Sep 2013, at 18:53, Bijal Sanghani wrote: >> >> > It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on >> > the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not >> > needed. >> Although I've been silent throughout the current Review Period, >> I'm still in favour of this proposal. > > I'm in favour of the this proposal. +1 Daniel Stolpe _________________________________________________________________________________ Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 stolpe at resilans.se Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 http://www.resilans.se/ Box 13 054 556741-1193 103 02 Stockholm From maurice.valentijn at trafego.net Tue Sep 10 13:50:02 2013 From: maurice.valentijn at trafego.net (M Valentijn | Trafego IS B.V.) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:50:02 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <522F05B4.3020305@velea.eu> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> <522F05B4.3020305@velea.eu> Message-ID: <5A5D4F6A-FEC4-4325-8E6B-07D50F0F40D6@trafego.net> +1 Met vriendelijke groet, Maurice Valentijn Trafego IS B.V. Hosting is een vak, wij zorgen ervoor dat u online blijft Ekelstraat 3 4726AN Heerle Helpdesk NL: 0165-700580 Helpdesk Be: 03-8080575 www.trafego.net www.facebook.com/trafego Op 10 sep 2013, om 13:42 heeft Elvis Velea het volgende geschreven: > Hi, > > On 9/10/13 1:41 PM, Erik Bais wrote: >>> You can find the full proposal at: >>> >>> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 >> >> As stated before I still oppose to this policy. >> >> Registration of PI space by a sponsoring LIR is an administrative task and >> doesn't have anything to do with abuse management. >> I foresee that publication of the sponsoring LIR will be abused for abuse >> messaging and relaying, while there is no network / operational relation >> between the end-user and the LIR. >> > > +1 > > -- > Kind regards, > Elvis Velea > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trafego-maillogo.png Type: image/png Size: 10392 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randy at psg.com Wed Sep 11 01:48:08 2013 From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:48:08 -1000 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> Message-ID: >> I'm in favour of the this proposal. ^ still From nick at netability.ie Wed Sep 11 14:29:12 2013 From: nick at netability.ie (Nick Hilliard) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 12:29:12 +0000 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> Message-ID: <52306218.7020101@netability.ie> Eric, On 10/09/2013 11:41, Erik Bais wrote: > Registration of PI space by a sponsoring LIR is an administrative task and > doesn't have anything to do with abuse management. This proposal is not about abuse management. It's about ensuring that the same standards of openness which apply to everything else in the RIPE database are also applied to PI resources. Registration openness and transparency are fundamental to the RIPE database, and the RIPE database is the core function of the RIPE NCC. These principals are why we have a RIPE database in the first place. If you disagree with this proposal, you should probably submit an alternative policy proposal to close off public access to the RIPE database and turn it into a private internal database, accessible only by the RIPE NCC. I don't know what this would achieve, but I don't think it would be a good thing. Nick From gert at space.net Wed Sep 11 14:26:29 2013 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:26:29 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> Message-ID: <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> Hi, On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 01:48:08PM -1000, Randy Bush wrote: > >> I'm in favour of the this proposal. > ^ still +1 And I do see a certain responsibility on the side of a sponsoring LIR to enable communication to the holder of the address space - after all, this *is* the role of the "sponsoring LIR": facilitate a contractual path between the NCC and the address space holder. If you think that your "sponsoring LIR clients" will cause lots of abuse mails to be sent to you, maybe you should not make them customers in the first place - or add a clause to your contracts that abuse handling will be billed to the customer (if they are responsible)? (OTOH, I'm not feeling really strong about this, so I won't enter a mudfight for it) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 306 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rhe at nosc.ja.net Wed Sep 11 14:35:41 2013 From: rhe at nosc.ja.net (Rob Evans) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:41 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> Message-ID: <10A9A2CF-C9DD-4479-8B16-F1FF882BB4CB@nosc.ja.net> > And I do see a certain responsibility on the side of a sponsoring LIR > to enable communication to the holder of the address space - after all, > this *is* the role of the "sponsoring LIR": facilitate a contractual > path between the NCC and the address space holder. This. I support this proposal. Regards, Rob -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 203 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From lists-ripe at c4inet.net Wed Sep 11 21:07:19 2013 From: lists-ripe at c4inet.net (Sascha Luck) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:07:19 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <52306218.7020101@netability.ie> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> <52306218.7020101@netability.ie> Message-ID: <20130911190719.GA87866@cilantro.c4inet.net> Nick, On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:29:12PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote: > >This proposal is not about abuse management. Did you read your own proposal? "Rationale a. Arguments supporting the proposal [...] Publishing this information provides an additional means for tackling abuse issues on the Internet." This sentence proves that one of the intentions of this proposal is to make a LIR responsible for the actions of a controversial and/or inconvenient end-user. It will therefore result in self-censorship of LIRs who are probably busy enough without being harassed by every vigilante on the internet - for the actions of a third party for which the LIR does NOTHING ELSE but handle paperwork to the NCC. rgds, Sascha Luck From sander at steffann.nl Wed Sep 11 21:09:57 2013 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 23:09:57 +0400 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> Message-ID: Hi, > And I do see a certain responsibility on the side of a sponsoring LIR > to enable communication to the holder of the address space - after all, > this *is* the role of the "sponsoring LIR": facilitate a contractual > path between the NCC and the address space holder. > > If you think that your "sponsoring LIR clients" will cause lots of > abuse mails to be sent to you, maybe you should not make them customers > in the first place - or add a clause to your contracts that abuse handling > will be billed to the customer (if they are responsible)? > > (OTOH, I'm not feeling really strong about this, so I won't enter > a mudfight for it) +1 to all of the above, Sander From lists-ripe at c4inet.net Wed Sep 11 21:11:25 2013 From: lists-ripe at c4inet.net (Sascha Luck) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:11:25 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <522F16F4.1000005@resilans.se> <20130911122629.GS65295@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20130911191125.GB87866@cilantro.c4inet.net> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 02:26:29PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: >If you think that your "sponsoring LIR clients" will cause lots of >abuse mails to be sent to you, maybe you should not make them customers >in the first place - or add a clause to your contracts that abuse handling >will be billed to the customer (if they are responsible)? And I suspect that this is the ulterior motivation for this proposal. Self censorship on the part of the LIR. >(OTOH, I'm not feeling really strong about this, so I won't enter >a mudfight for it) And I don't really care anymore what the RIPE community does or not. We'll route around you, too. rgds, Sascha Luck From sergey at devnull.ru Wed Sep 11 21:19:36 2013 From: sergey at devnull.ru (Sergey Myasoedov) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:19:36 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> Bijal: BS> As per the below mail, the NCC Services working group chairs decided to extend the BS> review period for 2012-08 until the 1st of October. BS> It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on the mailing BS> list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. I would like to avoid abuse reports which makes no sense for me. LIRs are not running networks with PI addressing, so the goal of proposal is incorrect. On the other hand, the community may ask the NCC to make the abuse-c field obligatory for PIs. Gert: > And I do see a certain responsibility on the side of a sponsoring LIR > to enable communication to the holder of the address space - after all, > this *is* the role of the "sponsoring LIR": facilitate a contractual > path between the NCC and the address space holder. At the moment, LIRs are responsible only for publishing contacts. You can propose to clarify the contractual requirements (RIPE-452). -- Sergey From gert at space.net Wed Sep 11 21:24:00 2013 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:24:00 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> Message-ID: <20130911192400.GU65295@Space.Net> Hi, On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:19:36PM +0200, Sergey Myasoedov wrote: > Gert: > > > And I do see a certain responsibility on the side of a sponsoring LIR > > to enable communication to the holder of the address space - after all, > > this *is* the role of the "sponsoring LIR": facilitate a contractual > > path between the NCC and the address space holder. > > At the moment, LIRs are responsible only for publishing contacts. You can propose to > clarify the contractual requirements (RIPE-452). This statement actually strengthens the proposal :-) - so if there is a PI network that has non-working contacts, who do you contact? The responsible person for that contact data... and how do you know who that is? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 306 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lists-ripe at c4inet.net Wed Sep 11 21:28:22 2013 From: lists-ripe at c4inet.net (Sascha Luck) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:28:22 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130911192400.GU65295@Space.Net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> <20130911192400.GU65295@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20130911192822.GC87866@cilantro.c4inet.net> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:24:00PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: >This statement actually strengthens the proposal :-) - so if there is a PI >network that has non-working contacts, who do you contact? The responsible >person for that contact data... and how do you know who that is? You contact the NCC. They know who the sponsor is and they have the contractual clout to enforce correct contacts. They can even reclaim the space in question. rgds, Sascha Luck From sergey at devnull.ru Wed Sep 11 21:32:45 2013 From: sergey at devnull.ru (Sergey Myasoedov) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:32:45 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130911192400.GU65295@Space.Net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> <20130911192400.GU65295@Space.Net> Message-ID: <9385CFED-A257-4A35-9828-A86DC801108C@devnull.ru> On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:24 PM, Gert Doering wrote: >> At the moment, LIRs are responsible only for publishing contacts. You can propose to >> clarify the contractual requirements (RIPE-452). > This statement actually strengthens the proposal :-) - so if there is a PI > network that has non-working contacts, who do you contact? The responsible > person for that contact data... and how do you know who that is? Usually I am using RIPE Abuse report form. I am very satisfied with it. -- Sergey From tore at fud.no Wed Sep 11 22:50:44 2013 From: tore at fud.no (Tore Anderson) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 22:50:44 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> Message-ID: <5230D7A4.5000007@fud.no> * Sergey Myasoedov wrote: > LIRs are not running networks with PI addressing LIRs may very well be running networks with PI addressing (I do!), so as a blanket statement, the above is false. For what it's worth, the reverse is also true: An LIR does not necessarily have anything to do with running the networks that are using PA addresses assigned by the LIR in question. However in this case, the LIR contact information are still clearly visible in the RIPE database (in the inet[6]num with status ALLOCATED PA). I see this proposal as bringing "parity" between PI and PA. Thus, +1. Tore From sergey at devnull.ru Thu Sep 12 00:45:47 2013 From: sergey at devnull.ru (Sergey Myasoedov) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 00:45:47 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <5230D7A4.5000007@fud.no> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> <5230D7A4.5000007@fud.no> Message-ID: On Sep 11, 2013, at 10:50 PM, Tore Anderson wrote: >> LIRs are not running networks with PI addressing > LIRs may very well be running networks with PI addressing (I do!), so as > a blanket statement, the above is false. Oh yes, but I believe we are talking about PIs with non-published LIR<->End User relationship. When PI owner become an LIR, the LIR normally become a sponsoring organization and it is easy to see and to get a contact details. In the case when LIR will not sponsor its own PI object, what is the point of publishing sponsor's regid? -- Sergey From tore at fud.no Thu Sep 12 07:04:57 2013 From: tore at fud.no (Tore Anderson) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 07:04:57 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <1004655154.20130911211936@devnull.ru> <5230D7A4.5000007@fud.no> Message-ID: <52314B79.2020204@fud.no> * Sergey Myasoedov > On Sep 11, 2013, at 10:50 PM, Tore Anderson wrote: > >>> LIRs are not running networks with PI addressing >> LIRs may very well be running networks with PI addressing (I do!), >> so as a blanket statement, the above is false. > > Oh yes, but I believe we are talking about PIs with non-published > LIR<->End User relationship. > When PI owner become an LIR, the LIR normally become a sponsoring > organization and it is easy to see and to get a contact details. > > In the case when LIR will not sponsor its own PI object, what is the > point of publishing sponsor's regid? I wasn't talking about my own PI blocks, I was talking about my customer's. Which are used on networks I run for them. In the end it's all integers anyway, and I'll happily operate those integers for my customers regardless of labels and how they were obtained, including (but not limited to): - PA addresses issued by my own LIR - PA addresses issued by another LIR - PI addresses sponsored by my own LIR - PI addresses sponsored by another LIR (Same shit, different wrapping. My routers cannot tell the difference.) In the case of PA blocks, the issuing LIR is always published in the database and on the FTP. The issuing LIR might very well have absolutely *nothing* to do with the End User's operational use of the addresses in question, yet we publish it. I don't see why PI addresses and their sponsoring LIRs should be treated any different than PA addresses and their issuing LIR in this regard. Tore From andreas.larsen at ip-only.se Thu Sep 12 08:45:24 2013 From: andreas.larsen at ip-only.se (Andreas Larsen) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 08:45:24 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I'm in favour of this proposal. // Andreas Med v?nlig h?lsning Andreas Larsen IP-Only Telecommunication AB| Postadress: 753 81 UPPSALA | Bes?ksadress: S:t Persgatan 6, Uppsala | Telefon: +46 (0)18 843 10 00 | Direkt: +46 (0)18 843 10 56 www.ip-only.se Den 2013-09-10 15:34 skrev Daniel Stolpe : > >On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Bengt G?rd?n wrote: > >> 2013-09-10 10:19, Niall O'Reilly skrev: >>> On 9 Sep 2013, at 18:53, Bijal Sanghani wrote: >>> >>> > It would really help us and the authors if we had some more >>>feedback on >>> > the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not >>> > needed. >>> Although I've been silent throughout the current Review Period, >>> I'm still in favour of this proposal. >> >> I'm in favour of the this proposal. > >+1 > > >Daniel Stolpe > >__________________________________________________________________________ >_______ >Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 >stolpe at resilans.se >Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 >http://www.resilans.se/ >Box 13 054 556741-1193 >103 02 Stockholm From nick at netability.ie Thu Sep 12 13:40:28 2013 From: nick at netability.ie (Nick Hilliard) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 12:40:28 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130911190719.GA87866@cilantro.c4inet.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> <00d201ceae1a$a3be6630$eb3b3290$@a2b-internet.com> <52306218.7020101@netability.ie> <20130911190719.GA87866@cilantro.c4inet.net> Message-ID: <5231A82C.4010606@netability.ie> On 11/09/2013 20:07, Sascha Luck wrote: > Did you read your own proposal? yep, it mentions abuse. It's at the bottom of the list because it was an afterthought in the list of reasons for justification and if it hadn't been mentioned, someone would have brought it up on ncc-services-wg anyway. Re: your other comment: > And I suspect that this is the ulterior motivation for this proposal. Self > censorship on the part of the LIR. Sorry to disappoint, but no ulterior motives. As author of the proposal, my concern is transparency and openness of registration information which has served us well over the last twentysomething years. If you feel strongly that registration information should be made private, then please submit a proposal to close off access to the rest of the RIPE database, because this is what you are arguing here. Nick From david.freedman at uk.clara.net Thu Sep 12 14:15:05 2013 From: david.freedman at uk.clara.net (David Freedman) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 12:15:05 +0000 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <5231A82C.4010606@netability.ie> Message-ID: > >> And I suspect that this is the ulterior motivation for this proposal. >>Self >> censorship on the part of the LIR. > >Sorry to disappoint, but no ulterior motives. As author of the proposal, >my concern is transparency and openness of registration information which >has served us well over the last twentysomething years. As a co-author, I'd like to chime in and mirror Nick's statement, for me it started as a frustration that the data couldn't be accessed easily (or without the assistance of the NCC). I think such openness and transparency is becoming increasingly more important in our industry. I see this as a step forwards, and not backwards. Dave. From job.snijders at atrato.com Thu Sep 12 15:33:13 2013 From: job.snijders at atrato.com (Job Snijders) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:33:13 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <5231A82C.4010606@netability.ie> Message-ID: <20130912133313.GC709@Alice.local> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:15:05PM +0000, David Freedman wrote: > I think such openness and transparency is becoming increasingly more > important in our industry. I see this as a step forwards, and not > backwards. I fully agree, I support the proposal and would love to see it implemented. Kind regards, Job -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 881 bytes Desc: not available URL: From m.hallgren at free.fr Thu Sep 12 15:41:15 2013 From: m.hallgren at free.fr (Michael Hallgren) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:41:15 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <20130912133313.GC709@Alice.local> References: <5231A82C.4010606@netability.ie> <20130912133313.GC709@Alice.local> Message-ID: <5231C47B.2070004@free.fr> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 +1, I agree. mh Le 12/09/2013 15:33, Job Snijders a ?crit : > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:15:05PM +0000, David Freedman wrote: > >> I think such openness and transparency is becoming increasingly more >> important in our industry. I see this as a step forwards, and not >> backwards. > > I fully agree, I support the proposal and would love to see it > implemented. > > Kind regards, > > Job -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlIxxHoACgkQZNZ/rrgsqaeofwCfQm0PNbplnIHV5Hvu/BaDrVJc icgAoJACm09hhmhL4ncCCRJ+dmKvubTk =Xqx9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From richih.mailinglist at gmail.com Thu Sep 19 23:57:36 2013 From: richih.mailinglist at gmail.com (Richard Hartmann) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:57:36 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: Dear all, I still maintain that the benefits outweigh the potential downsides so I am still in favour of this proposal. Richard From rogerj at gmail.com Sat Sep 21 10:54:25 2013 From: rogerj at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_J=F8rgensen?=) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 10:54:25 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Bijal Sanghani wrote: > Dear All, > > As per the below mail, the NCC Services working group chairs decided to extend the review period for 2012-08 until the 1st of October. > > It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. > > Please take a few minutes (it's not a lot to read) and let us know your thoughts so that we can move to the next steps once the review period has ended. supported -- Roger Jorgensen | ROJO9-RIPE rogerj at gmail.com | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | roger at jorgensen.no From achatz at forthnetgroup.gr Sat Sep 21 12:12:19 2013 From: achatz at forthnetgroup.gr (Tassos Chatzithomaoglou) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 13:12:19 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: <523D7103.6050604@forthnetgroup.gr> support -- Tassos Roger J?rgensen wrote on 21/9/2013 11:54: > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Bijal Sanghani > wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> As per the below mail, the NCC Services working group chairs decided to extend the review period for 2012-08 until the 1st of October. >> >> It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. >> >> Please take a few minutes (it's not a lot to read) and let us know your thoughts so that we can move to the next steps once the review period has ended. > supported > > From james.blessing at despres.co.uk Mon Sep 23 11:44:37 2013 From: james.blessing at despres.co.uk (James Blessing) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 10:44:37 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Fwd: 2012-08 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Could have sworn this started out in ap-wg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Blessing Date: 22 September 2013 10:53 Subject: 2012-08 To: Address Policy Working Group Support (I seem to deleted the original thread) J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476 -- James Blessing 07989 039 476 From denis at ripe.net Mon Sep 23 15:50:28 2013 From: denis at ripe.net (Denis Walker) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 15:50:28 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] RIPE Database Release 1.69 Available Now In-Reply-To: <522DCCD6.9060205@ripe.net> References: <522DCCD6.9060205@ripe.net> Message-ID: <52404724.7070409@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, Release 1.69 of the RIPE Database has now been fully deployed. Regards, Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Team -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [db-wg] RIPE Database Release 1.69 Available Soon Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 15:27:50 +0200 From: Denis Walker Organization: RIPE NCC To: Database WG , NCC Services WG Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC is pleased to announce that we have deployed a new release of the RIPE Database to the TEST Database environment. Detailed information about the new release, including dates and information about the changes can be found here: https://www.ripe.net/data-tools/db/release-notes/ripe-database-release-1.69 Of special note in this release is the inclusion of "dry-run". Using the dry-run function you can test whether an update would succeed or not. The update procedure runs as normal except that no change is made to the database. Find out more about the dry-run function here: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/denis/dry-run-testing-in-the-ripe-database Due to recent issues with the REST API, we've extended the migration period up until the 1.70 release. This release is currently scheduled for the end of October. If you have any questions or comments, we look forward to hearing them! Regards, Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Team From training at ripe.net Tue Sep 24 11:26:40 2013 From: training at ripe.net (Training Team) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:26:40 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] [training] RIPE NCC Webinars - new dates In-Reply-To: <52415A4B.1010707@ripe.net> References: <52415A4B.1010707@ripe.net> Message-ID: <52415AD0.4030601@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, We are pleased to announce the launch of new dates for our Webinars. The RIPE NCC Webinars are live and take only one hour. You can interact with our trainers without leaving your desk. We focus on the topics and issues most important for LIRs. Register now at https://lirportal.ripe.net/training/courses Participation is limited to 20 people, so don't hesitate if you want to take part! If you have questions, please email . We look forward to seeing you online. Kind regards, RIPE NCC Training Services From bijal.sanghani at euro-ix.net Tue Sep 24 11:49:22 2013 From: bijal.sanghani at euro-ix.net (Bijal Sanghani) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 10:49:22 +0100 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2013-04 Last Call for Comments (Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members) In-Reply-To: <20130903131158.48D0D2E24D@melix.ams-ix.net> References: <20130903131158.48D0D2E24D@melix.ams-ix.net> Message-ID: <3409A17D-EEE3-49DF-975D-A2EA8AE6E084@euro-ix.net> Dear All, A gentle reminder the proposal 2013-04, Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members is currently under last call. If you have any last minute comments please let us know by next week 2nd October 2013. The proposal can be found here: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-04 If we do not receive any further comments, as described in the mail below this proposal will complete the PDP and will be evaluated by the co-Chairs of all RIPE Working Groups for consensus. Best regards, Bijal On 3 Sep 2013, at 14:10, Marco Schmidt wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > > The proposal described in 2013-04, Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members, > is now in its Concluding Phase. > > The RIPE NCC Services Working Group co-Chairs have declared that consensus for > the proposal has been reached and it will now move to Last Call. > > As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of these > coming four weeks of Last Call is to give the community the opportunity > to present well-justified objections in case anyone missed the previous > two phases and want to oppose the proposal. > > Any objection must be made by 2 October 2013 and must be supported by an > explanation. > > If no substantive objections are raised by the end of Last Call, the > proposal will complete the PDP and will be evaluated by the co-Chairs of > all RIPE Working Groups for consensus. > > You can find the full proposal at: > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-04 > > Please e-mail any final comments about this proposal to ncc-services-wg at ripe.net > before 2 October 2013. > > > Regards > > Marco Schmidt > Policy Development Office > RIPE NCC > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From matt.parker at ripe.net Tue Sep 24 12:47:45 2013 From: matt.parker at ripe.net (Matt Parker) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:47:45 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Introducing the Assisted Registry Check Message-ID: <52416DD1.5000504@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, After a successful pilot, the RIPE NCC is pleased to announce the launch of the Assisted Registry Check (ARC) - an improvement to our existing audit activities based on feedback from members and the RIPE community. As mandated by the RIPE community, the RIPE NCC has always conducted regular audits of LIRs to ensure the quality and currency of their registry data. Until now, these audits have largely been conducted whenever an LIR requested an additional IPv4 allocation. However, now that we've reached the final /8 and LIRs can only receive one final /22 IPv4 allocation, there will be a significant drop in the number of these "additional allocation audits" carried out by the RIPE NCC. The ARC review is a way for the RIPE NCC to maintain this periodic contact with LIRs and to ensure that the accuracy of data in the RIPE Registry is maintained, without placing any additional burden on the participating LIR's operations. It was clear from previous feedback that the RIPE NCC's audit activities needed to be more efficient and less time consuming for LIRs. With this in mind, the RIPE NCC will initially conduct ARC reviews for a period of three months, during which time we will closely monitor the time and effort required by LIRs. At the end of this period, we will complete an in-depth review and incorporate any feedback as appropriate. Continual development is a vital component of the ARC review and will ensure that the activity remains relevant, useful and helpful to LIRs. During the ARC review, the RIPE NCC will perform a variety of consistency checks to assess the quality of LIRs' registry data. We will then provide personalised support to help correct any issues that are found. This helps to raise awareness of routing and reverse DNS inconsistencies as well as helping LIRs to strengthen the quality of their registry data. More information about what the ARC review involves can be found here: https://www.ripe.net/lir-services/resource-management/assisted-registry-check There is also a RIPE Labs article that explains the process in more detail here: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/matt_parker/the-assisted-registry-check-let-us-help-you If you are interested in participating and would like to volunteer for an Assisted Registry Check, please send us an email at and we will contact you with further details. Kind regards Matt Parker Registration Services RIPE NCC From mgrigore at ripe.net Wed Sep 25 18:12:08 2013 From: mgrigore at ripe.net (Mihnea-Costin Grigore) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:12:08 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process Message-ID: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, Before the previous RIPE Meeting in Dublin, a number of proposals were brought forward in the RIPE NCC Services Working Group by members of the community, dealing with suggested updates to the technical infrastructure that supports the Policy Development Process. You can read the corresponding threads here: 1. "plain text" https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-services-wg/2013-March/002154.html 2. "PDP names" https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-services-wg/2013-March/002150.html 3. "unified diff" https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-services-wg/2013-March/002151.html 4. "everything should use GIT" https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-services-wg/2013-March/002152.html A lively discussion ensued on the mailing list, and it was also part of the agenda of the Working Group at the RIPE 66 Meeting in Dublin: https://ripe66.ripe.net/archives/steno/13/ Following feedback from the community, a group was formed to address the issue and agree on a problem statement that would approach the issue from a high level, without going into technical and implementation details. The group consisted of Richard Hartmann, Alex Le Heux, Ruediger Volk, Emilio Madaio and myself. The group had a number of remote conferences and email discussions over the summer, and would like to present to you a finalised version of the problem statement (attached below). Please let us know if you think the text can be improved in any way, sending your comments and any suggestions to the list. Once a consensus is reached by the community, the RIPE NCC will evaluate the feedback and propose possible solutions. Regards, Mihnea-Costin Grigore RIPE NCC [------------8<------------] Problem Statement -------------------- The RIPE PDP process is too complicated for everyone: outsiders, new members, experienced members, authors, and the RIPE NCC. Therefore, participation should be made easier, especially for new-comers. Main scope: - The initial focus and effort are on the RIPE PDP -- proposals, drafts and policy documents; if any progress is made here, then we can think of applying the same or similar solutions to other areas of RIPE documentation - Any solutions discussed should also work for non-techies Details of the problem: a) The meta-data provided is incomplete: - RIPE Policy Documents and Policy Proposals don't have unique and clearly identified global names/identifiers - There is no clear version and date for publication - There is no track of who and when requested and approved a certain change - There is no clear up to date succession and obsolescence information within documents - There is no canonical way to get an overview of all currently active documents b) There is no systematic access to all versions of a document: - There is no directly available history - There are no easy to use tools to correlate between versions - There are no tools for authors to submit new/corrected versions of a document as it evolves through the PDP c) There is no plain-text version of each document and version thereof in ASCII format [------------8<------------] -- Mihnea-Costin Grigore RIPE NCC Web Services Team Leader - http://www.ripe.net/ From gert at space.net Wed Sep 25 20:53:59 2013 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 20:53:59 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20130925185359.GX65295@Space.Net> Hi, On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:12:08PM +0200, Mihnea-Costin Grigore wrote: > Problem Statement > -------------------- > The RIPE PDP process is too complicated for everyone: outsiders, new > members, experienced members, authors, and the RIPE NCC. Therefore, > participation should be made easier, especially for new-comers. > > Main scope: > - The initial focus and effort are on the RIPE PDP -- proposals, drafts > and policy documents; if any progress is made here, then we can think of > applying the same or similar solutions to other areas of RIPE documentation > - Any solutions discussed should also work for non-techies > > Details of the problem: > > a) The meta-data provided is incomplete: > - RIPE Policy Documents and Policy Proposals don't have unique and > clearly identified global names/identifiers > - There is no clear version and date for publication > - There is no track of who and when requested and approved a certain change > - There is no clear up to date succession and obsolescence information > within documents > - There is no canonical way to get an overview of all currently active > documents > > b) There is no systematic access to all versions of a document: > - There is no directly available history > - There are no easy to use tools to correlate between versions > - There are no tools for authors to submit new/corrected versions of a > document as it evolves through the PDP > > c) There is no plain-text version of each document and version thereof > in ASCII format > > [------------8<------------] I find this a fairly impressive piece of work - it follows the rule "a document is perfect if there is no longer something to take away", which is much harder than writing a 50 page document. And I agree with the problem statement :-) Gert -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 306 bytes Desc: not available URL: From richih.mailinglist at gmail.com Wed Sep 25 22:38:04 2013 From: richih.mailinglist at gmail.com (Richard Hartmann) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 22:38:04 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: Dear Mihnea-Costin, once again, thanks for your work on this. Also thanks for Marco Schmidt. As bad luck would have it, I now realize that I made a few grammar mistakes; those can be fixed once we all agree on a problem statement. Also, at least in part due to my own oversight when re-reading the final draft, there are two other points which didn't make it into this text: * There is no way to ensure that what authors send in is exactly, i.e. no more, no less, what makes it into new versions. * There is no canonical way to keep an up to date local copy of all documents As they are not part of the draft, I would appreciate a distinct +/-1 on both of them from anyone who comments so we can judge if they should be included. Thanks to anyone who reads this and cares to answer, Richard From gert at space.net Wed Sep 25 23:15:50 2013 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 23:15:50 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20130925211550.GY65295@Space.Net> Hi, On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:38:04PM +0200, Richard Hartmann wrote: > * There is no way to ensure that what authors send in is exactly, i.e. > no more, no less, what makes it into new versions. > * There is no canonical way to keep an up to date local copy of all documents +1 Gert Doering -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 306 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sander at steffann.nl Wed Sep 25 23:37:19 2013 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 23:37:19 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: Hi Richard, > As bad luck would have it, I now realize that I made a few grammar > mistakes; those can be fixed once we all agree on a problem statement. > > > Also, at least in part due to my own oversight when re-reading the > final draft, there are two other points which didn't make it into this > text: > > * There is no way to ensure that what authors send in is exactly, i.e. > no more, no less, what makes it into new versions. > * There is no canonical way to keep an up to date local copy of all documents > > As they are not part of the draft, I would appreciate a distinct +/-1 > on both of them from anyone who comments so we can judge if they > should be included. +1 to both of them, and also a +1 on the draft itself. Sander From leo.vegoda at icann.org Wed Sep 25 23:45:39 2013 From: leo.vegoda at icann.org (Leo Vegoda) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:45:39 -0700 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <5648A8908CCB564EBF46E2BC904A75B184E16F61CC@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Hi, [...] > c) There is no plain-text version of each document and version thereof > in ASCII format Is ASCII format a synonym for plain text or is the proposal actually to force the use of ASCII rather than a more modern character encoding? Thanks, Leo Vegoda -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5475 bytes Desc: not available URL: From richih.mailinglist at gmail.com Wed Sep 25 23:57:11 2013 From: richih.mailinglist at gmail.com (Richard Hartmann) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 23:57:11 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: <5648A8908CCB564EBF46E2BC904A75B184E16F61CC@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> <5648A8908CCB564EBF46E2BC904A75B184E16F61CC@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Leo Vegoda wrote: > Is ASCII format a synonym for plain text or is the proposal actually to > force the use of ASCII rather than a more modern character encoding? As of right now, it really does mean ASCII as full UTF-8 was too controversial and there was no hard need for it. FWIW, IETF is moving towards having the actual text in ASCII-only and allowing UTF-8 in metadata like author names. This allows easing in something new while still remaining 100% backwards-compatible. For the record, I am fine with all three of those options and will not push towards any of those. Whichever has the highest likelihood of reaching consensus has my support. There already has been a _lot_ of effort behind the scenes and I would like to see this implemented ASAP :) -- Richard From tore at fud.no Thu Sep 26 09:27:45 2013 From: tore at fud.no (Tore Anderson) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:27:45 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <5243E1F1.9020809@fud.no> * Richard Hartmann > * There is no way to ensure that what authors send in is exactly, i.e. > no more, no less, what makes it into new versions. > * There is no canonical way to keep an up to date local copy of all documents +1, and also to the problem statement itself. I've got recent experience with the first point you mention in particular, as changes I request going into a new version of a proposal got ever so slightly changed - not in a significant way (a word going away here, "the" turning into "their" there, ...), and I have no reason to believe it was intentional or anything like that - but it's very hard to spot with the current lack of tools. That it is possible for these bugs to sneak in in the first place is also a tell-tale sign that the tools aren't good enough - I'm suspecting manual transcribing from e-mails to internal work documents is what's going on here. So assuming we get C in order first: All the points under B, the two additional points above, plus the third point under A, could all be solved in one fell swoop by using a proper version control system. It would be super nice to be able to clone the ripe-document-store repo, make a proposal branch, work on it and finally tag MyProp v1, push to the PDO, merging in any other unrelated proposals from the main branch as they get accepted, repeat, until (hopefully) merging back to the main branch....but I guess I'm not supposed to define solutions at this point, so I'll stop there. ;-) Tore From ml+ripe-list at x-net.be Thu Sep 26 13:36:16 2013 From: ml+ripe-list at x-net.be (Gerry Demaret) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:36:16 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <52441C30.9000905@x-net.be> On 09/25/2013 10:38 PM, Richard Hartmann wrote: > * There is no way to ensure that what authors send in is exactly, i.e. > no more, no less, what makes it into new versions. > * There is no canonical way to keep an up to date local copy of all documents > > As they are not part of the draft, I would appreciate a distinct +/-1 > on both of them from anyone who comments so we can judge if they > should be included. A very enthusiastic +1 to both the original text and the additional points raised by Richard. Thanks to all involved for making this happen, I'm looking forward to the implementation. Gerry From ripe.ncc-services-wg at ml.karotte.org Thu Sep 26 17:06:50 2013 From: ripe.ncc-services-wg at ml.karotte.org (Sebastian Wiesinger) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 17:06:50 +0200 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Update regarding the proposals to improve the technical infrastructure supporting the RIPE Policy Development Process In-Reply-To: References: <52430B58.2080706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20130926150650.GA30160@danton.fire-world.de> * Richard Hartmann [2013-09-25 22:39]: > * There is no way to ensure that what authors send in is exactly, i.e. > no more, no less, what makes it into new versions. > * There is no canonical way to keep an up to date local copy of all documents +1 to this and the original text. Regards Sebastian -- GPG Key: 0x93A0B9CE (F4F6 B1A3 866B 26E9 450A 9D82 58A2 D94A 93A0 B9CE) 'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE. -- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant From ggiannou at gmail.com Mon Sep 30 15:33:36 2013 From: ggiannou at gmail.com (George Giannousopoulos) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 16:33:36 +0300 Subject: [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Review Period extended until 1 October 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources) In-Reply-To: <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> References: <20130902135457.064122E0D9@melix.ams-ix.net> <54B390BA-3C7F-4DB4-A9C5-47FD39F70B2E@euro-ix.net> Message-ID: Hello all, +1 George On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Bijal Sanghani wrote: > Dear All, > > As per the below mail, the NCC Services working group chairs decided to > extend the review period for 2012-08 until the 1st of October. > > It would really help us and the authors if we had some more feedback on > the mailing list, even a +1 to go ahead or -1 if you feel it's not needed. > > Please take a few minutes (it's not a lot to read) and let us know your > thoughts so that we can move to the next steps once the review period has > ended. > > Many thanks, > > Bijal and Kurtis > NCC Service WG Chairs > > > > On 2 Sep 2013, at 14:39, Marco Schmidt wrote: > > > > > Dear Colleagues, > > > > > > The Review Period for the proposal 2012-08, "Publication of Sponsoring > LIR > > for Independent Number Resources", has been extended until 1 October > 2013. > > > > > > You can find the full proposal at: > > > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-08 > > > > > > We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments > > to . > > > > Regards, > > > > Marco Schmidt > > Policy Development Office > > RIPE NCC > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: