Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Introducing the RIPE NCC Report Form
Chris commented: #1) if you have a legal problem, go to a legal organisation ("police"), not #ripe. clarify your legal issues there. ripe isn't the place for this. Errors in registration details are not a police matter. Errors in registration details ARE directly germane to RIPE's remit as administrator of number resources, a function it provides for those in its region on behalf of the worldwide Internet community. #2) i generally appreciate ripe ncc's efforts to provide adequate aid in case of #any problems - nevertheless it has it's functions and tasks to stick to, #letting sbdy use it to mess with ripe-external stuff Maintenance of the database documenting who's been allocated/assigned space is *core* to RIPE's mission. #non-ripe-charged 'ripe-extraterritorials' creating lengthy flamey #threats as to what kind of services they "demand" from ripe, i btw #find - err - "curious"... Note that by RIPE policy, participation in RIPE Working Groups (including the Anti-Abuse Working Group) is open to all, which is, I believe, an appropriate reflection of the fact that RIPE-allocated resources can and do have an impact on users worldwide. Of course, if you take issue with that policy, you're free to propose a new policy that would change that. #3) if the complainant isn't prepared, able, or willing to express his complaint #against the alleged suspect, this probably already says it all... (ok so much: #then ncc shouldn't play bully for some troll) The question on the table was a simple one: what should be required of a party notifying RIPE of a data inaccuracy in the existing database. Should the notifying party be required to demonstrate exhaustion of all possible self-notification channels before referring the matter to RIPE as a "last resort?" No. A good Samaritan volunteer reporters has no obligation to do RIPE's work for them, and any attempt to impose arbitrary additional obligations on voluntary reporters is misplaced and inappropriate, and shows a lack of respect for the community member making that report. I see nothing wrong or inappropriate about expecting a RIR to maintain accurate records concerning the resouces it oversees, nor do I see how that makes anyone a "troll." Regards, Joe
Joe ALWAYS says everything I want to say, in much better detail. RIPE NCC can rely on the community for reports - but not for all the due diligence that RIPE staff would normally have to perform in validating those reports On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Joe St Sauver <joe@oregon.uoregon.edu> wrote:
A good Samaritan volunteer reporters has no obligation to do RIPE's work for them, and any attempt to impose arbitrary additional obligations on voluntary reporters is misplaced and inappropriate, and shows a lack of respect for the community member making that report.
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
On 04/10/2012 05:18 PM, Joe St Sauver wrote:
Errors in registration details are not a police matter.
if they aren't, they're not a matter at all. your private stuff isn't a public matter (interesting fact: the ancient greeks had a word for that attitude...)
Errors in registration details ARE directly germane to RIPE's remit as administrator of number resources, a function it provides for those in its region on behalf of the worldwide Internet community.
ripe is the administration of number resources. one of the services kindly provided by ripe is a whois db. if you have an issue where that db might help you - good. that's independent from any legal issue. if you have a legal issue, and db doesn't help you, you will have to go the canonical way (you'll have to anyway, even if db tells you what you want). you have no claim towards the services sbdy provides you to be of general help. ripe knows where it allocates the space to. if judiciary asks ripe (failing or not willing to read the db), ripe tells them. actually, if sbdy else than judiciary asked, telling them would be illegal - if it wasn't data entered into a public database. to let some steam off, why don't you go to internic et al (like godaddy and whoever) with your whois db ideas, that'd be a great place to run riot, wouldn't it... and you could even pretend it's kind of your business...
Maintenance of the database documenting who's been allocated/assigned space is *core* to RIPE's mission.
simply wrong. ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
Note that by RIPE policy, participation in RIPE Working Groups (including
just re-read my statement you are refering to. telling me that i and not you have to pay for your weirdness, i find impertinent.
party notifying RIPE of a data inaccuracy in the existing database. Should the notifying party be required to demonstrate exhaustion of all possible self-notification channels before referring the matter to RIPE as a "last resort?" No.
well, you know, you'll tell them "i did!" anyway. and trust me, they know that, too. and to get to the point, i just hope and am currently convinced that ncc will act apropriately according to the individual case...
A good Samaritan volunteer reporters has no obligation to do RIPE's work
that's a good one. the good samaritan troll. ;)) ok, the good guy is free to report to ripe whatever he thinks he should. i think that's good. having this discussion over and over again sucks. i guess it's time to think about using the refer attribute for inet*num. regards, Chris
Chris, "Chris" wrote the following on 11/04/2012 11:03:
On 04/10/2012 05:18 PM, Joe St Sauver wrote:
Maintenance of the database documenting who's been allocated/assigned space is *core* to RIPE's mission.
simply wrong. ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/ncc/functions Specifically the development and maintenance of the RIPE DB. Once all of v4 space is allocated (soon now, soon), the primary job of the NCC and the other four RIRs will be keeping a good registry. I do speak for the NCC, but a substantial amount of the narrative recently has been around keeping that registry up to date and, indeed, attempting to find new and interesting ways of making sure the members put the right data in the right place. Brian.
On 04/11/2012 02:13 PM, Brian Nisbet wrote:
ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
right, that sums it up nicely, thanks.
Once all of v4 space is allocated (soon now, soon), the primary job of the NCC and the other four RIRs will be keeping a good registry.
ripe's job isn't defined by and doesn't depend on whether or not v4 space is completely allocated (which it btw probably never will). keeping a good registry is as explained a service kindly provided by ripe to help - and it did that since the beginning. regards, Chris
Chris Heinze wrote:
On 04/11/2012 02:13 PM, Brian Nisbet wrote:
ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
right, that sums it up nicely, thanks.
Once all of v4 space is allocated (soon now, soon), the primary job of the NCC and the other four RIRs will be keeping a good registry.
ripe's job isn't defined by and doesn't depend on whether or not v4 space is completely allocated (which it btw probably never will). keeping a good registry is as explained a service kindly provided by ripe to help - and it did that since the beginning.
Hm, current stats here for April (worldwide): - 4.112 abuse reports submitted - about 800 whois records without any email address - about 600 reports returned with "user unknown" - about 150 reports returned with "mailserver unreachable" - about 100 reports returned with "mailbox full" 30% spam and abuse from the RIPE region (russia alone has 11,18% here with us). A quick estimation shows me, that we find about 1000 objects in RIPEs database PER MONTH, that have none or a not working abuse email contact. Maybe the RIPE NCC tries, but they do not try hard enough ... Kind regards, Frank
regards,
Chris
-- Mit freundlichen Gruessen, -- MOTD: "have you enabled SSL on a website or mailbox today ?" -- PHADE Software - PowerWeb http://www.powerweb.de Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast mailto:frank@powerweb.de Schinkelstrasse 17 fon: +49 33200 52920 14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany fax: +49 33200 52921 ======================================================================
Hm, current stats here for April (worldwide):
Whoa. Frank, I will be in touch with you pretty soon. I have been pondering on something for quite a while and, well, the time seems to be ripe (pun.. thanks srsh). +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Disclaimer Dit e-mailbericht kan vertrouwelijke informatie bevatten of informatie die is beschermd door een beroepsgeheim. Indien dit bericht niet voor u is bestemd, wijzen wij u erop dat elke vorm van verspreiding, vermenigvuldiging of ander gebruik ervan niet is toegestaan. Indien dit bericht blijkbaar bij vergissing bij u terecht is gekomen, verzoeken wij u ons daarvan direct op de hoogte te stellen via tel.nr 070 315 3500 of e-mail mailto:mail@opta.nl en het bericht te vernietigen. Dit e-mailbericht is uitsluitend gecontroleerd op virussen. OPTA aanvaardt geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor de feitelijke inhoud en juistheid van dit bericht en er kunnen geen rechten aan worden ontleend. This e-mail message may contain confidential information or information protected by professional privilege. If it is not intended for you, you should be aware that any distribution, copying or other form of use of this message is not permitted. If it has apparently reached you by mistake, we urge you to notify us by phone +31 70 315 3500 or e-mail mailto:mail@opta.nl and destroy the message immediately. This e-mail message has only been checked for viruses. The accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of the information provided cannot be guaranteed. OPTA expressly disclaims any responsibility in relation to the information in this e-mail message. No rights can be derived from this message.
did you aggregate those reports by cidr / asn / shared ns or shared whois for the domain etc? --srs (iPad) On 11-Apr-2012, at 20:05, Frank Gadegast <ripe-anti-spam-wg@powerweb.de> wrote:
Chris Heinze wrote:
On 04/11/2012 02:13 PM, Brian Nisbet wrote:
ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
right, that sums it up nicely, thanks.
Once all of v4 space is allocated (soon now, soon), the primary job of the NCC and the other four RIRs will be keeping a good registry.
ripe's job isn't defined by and doesn't depend on whether or not v4 space is completely allocated (which it btw probably never will). keeping a good registry is as explained a service kindly provided by ripe to help - and it did that since the beginning.
Hm, current stats here for April (worldwide):
- 4.112 abuse reports submitted - about 800 whois records without any email address - about 600 reports returned with "user unknown" - about 150 reports returned with "mailserver unreachable" - about 100 reports returned with "mailbox full"
30% spam and abuse from the RIPE region (russia alone has 11,18% here with us).
A quick estimation shows me, that we find about 1000 objects in RIPEs database PER MONTH, that have none or a not working abuse email contact.
Maybe the RIPE NCC tries, but they do not try hard enough ...
Kind regards, Frank
regards,
Chris
--
Mit freundlichen Gruessen, -- MOTD: "have you enabled SSL on a website or mailbox today ?" -- PHADE Software - PowerWeb http://www.powerweb.de Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast mailto:frank@powerweb.de Schinkelstrasse 17 fon: +49 33200 52920 14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany fax: +49 33200 52921 ======================================================================
2012/4/11 Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie>:
Chris,
"Chris" wrote the following on 11/04/2012 11:03:
On 04/10/2012 05:18 PM, Joe St Sauver wrote:
Maintenance of the database documenting who's been allocated/assigned space is *core* to RIPE's mission.
simply wrong. ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
Ripe's core is at least to provide **change management** over contact on allocation of internet resources (IP, AS) so that stakeholder's can cooperate, since internet protocols relies on swift cooperation between entities. Imagine a world in which you cannot reach a LIR or RIR having wrong BGP rules ? Furthermore, RIPE NCC is bound by its contract with ICANN in its mission of allocating resources. I think reading the actual contract might settle the topic pretty fast. Since I don't have the contract under my eyes right now, I will make a simple reasoning based on public informations and personnal experience. Let's stick to the common sense of database first : *Data accuracy is the most important property of a database.* Ripe NCC is entitled to manage the whois database, therefore it is in their mission to ensure DB integrity. If it is not convincing enough, let's remember data accuracy is considered by ICANN as a **MUST DO** for delegated entities (both for gTLD and resources). Just search ICANN web sites and you'll have extended papers explaining why accuracy matters, and how this responsability is also delegated. http://www.icann.org/en/gsearch/accuracy In a world without accurate whois contact it will be the the strongest's rule that shall prevail. What tickles me is how can RIPE NCC bill instances they don't have the **accurate** contacts ? Are there 2 DBs one for billing (with accurate data) and another one for public access with inaccurate data ? RIPE NCC cant choose the parts it likes in its delegated mission from ICANN. A contract is a contract and RIPE NCC is bound by its duties regarding ICANN. If ICANN states RIPE NCC MUST have accurates data, and MUST enforce internet policies I cannot see how RIPE NCC or RIPE can decide it is does not fall into their responsabilities. Now, all everybody needs to know : * what level of accuracy ICANN can realistcly expect from its delegates ? * what are the internet policies ICANN mentions ? Cheers. -- Jul Experienced freelance for years (having worked for ISP).
time to aggregate: "ripe's core task is to provide the db in the form *i* want it" obviously not true. ripe's core task is number resource coordination, the db is a service, if ripe decided not to provide for it - then there simply wouldn't be one. "icann says $foobar" go talk with icann about that. "$foo cannot be reached. we phoned them up, but they didn't react to our inquiries the way we wanted them to. we didn't want to send them postal mail. they didn't publish an email in whois, but we mailed them anyway, but they didn't answer the way we wanted them to. we want ripe to take their resources away because we say so, and because of this example, we want everybody to be forced to publish a spamable email address that works [by which probably a heap of further madness is implied]" i think this summary is already formulated in a way so my points are clear... another thing: if $a has about 100 issues per month with $b, and they even are in the same country and jurisdiction - sorry, but the picture painted is something like: $a nags $b (big time - i mean, a hundred issues per month...) because $a wants something from $b, but $b obviously seems to have a different view on the issue, and obviously the law is on $b's side (that ther's no lea in said jurisdiction is ofc a very blatant lie), and therefore $a wants ripe to take "somebody's" resources away in case they don't comply to rules $a wants to put up (and which don't make rational sense). i'd call _that_ abuse... if "ugly" db statistics are the issue, the working and straightforward solution would be a refer attribute in inet*num objects. with the ripe's allocation objects remaining, the quality of the ripe whois db would probably be very good. regards, Chris
Chris wrote:
"ripe's core task is to provide the db in the form *i* want it"
obviously not true. ripe's core task is number resource coordination, the db is a service, if ripe decided not to provide for it - then there simply wouldn't be one.
Sorry, but the above statement IS true indeed. Chris: you are mixing RIPE and RIPE NCC. The community has a real interest in an up-to-date and working whois db, e.g. we all can see on this list. And RIPE NCC has to fullfill this interest. Its only on us to define how far RIPE NCC should go. And if the data in the whois db is not correct enough for us, we need to tell the NCC how to improve this. I would recommend an RFC about validation methods, RIPE NCC should implement after Tobias new abuse-c is in place. Kind regards, Frank
"icann says $foobar"
go talk with icann about that.
"$foo cannot be reached. we phoned them up, but they didn't react to our inquiries the way we wanted them to. we didn't want to send them postal mail. they didn't publish an email in whois, but we mailed them anyway, but they didn't answer the way we wanted them to. we want ripe to take their resources away because we say so, and because of this example, we want everybody to be forced to publish a spamable email address that works [by which probably a heap of further madness is implied]"
i think this summary is already formulated in a way so my points are clear... another thing: if $a has about 100 issues per month with $b, and they even are in the same country and jurisdiction - sorry, but the picture painted is something like: $a nags $b (big time - i mean, a hundred issues per month...) because $a wants something from $b, but $b obviously seems to have a different view on the issue, and obviously the law is on $b's side (that ther's no lea in said jurisdiction is ofc a very blatant lie), and therefore $a wants ripe to take "somebody's" resources away in case they don't comply to rules $a wants to put up (and which don't make rational sense). i'd call _that_ abuse...
if "ugly" db statistics are the issue, the working and straightforward solution would be a refer attribute in inet*num objects. with the ripe's allocation objects remaining, the quality of the ripe whois db would probably be very good.
regards,
Chris
-- Mit freundlichen Gruessen, -- PHADE Software - PowerWeb http://www.powerweb.de Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast mailto:frank@powerweb.de Schinkelstrasse 17 fon: +49 33200 52920 14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany fax: +49 33200 52921 ======================================================================
On 04/11/2012 06:43 PM, Frank Gadegast wrote:
obviously not true. ripe's core task is number resource coordination, the db is a service, if ripe decided not to provide for it - then there simply wouldn't be one.
Sorry, but the above statement IS true indeed. Chris: you are mixing RIPE and RIPE NCC.
no. it is ripe's and ncc's core task. so talking about ripe as a superset or at least including ncc this is absolutely correct.
The community has a real interest in an up-to-date and working whois db,
first of all it's not up to you (or any single one else) to decide for the community. and it's e.g. my and probably many others' interest that ncc can coordinate to make ip work. what you are calling for - no matter what you call it - doesn't affect this coordination task. what you are calling for essentially also isn't a working db (it works, and you are free to talk to people to ask them to change their objects according to your ideas), but making ripe some sort of police-substitute, and forcing everybody to follow your strange ideas which are not ripe-business. but being an enlightened (errm - i mean that french thing, you know, don't mistake this for hybris, please :) ) netizen, data economy btw is a real interest for me (actually it's the law)... maybe sbdy from ncc has an estimate on introducing a refer attribute in inet*num objects. i guess this should effectively lead to a technically less complex, as more streamlined, db. regards, Chris
Chris wrote:
On 04/11/2012 06:43 PM, Frank Gadegast wrote:
obviously not true. ripe's core task is number resource coordination, the db is a service, if ripe decided not to provide for it - then there simply wouldn't be one.
Sorry, but the above statement IS true indeed. Chris: you are mixing RIPE and RIPE NCC.
no. it is ripe's and ncc's core task. so talking about ripe as a superset
Not a superset, a community.
or at least including ncc this is absolutely correct.
The community has a real interest in an up-to-date and working whois db,
first of all it's not up to you (or any single one else) to decide for the community.
I did not "decide" anything (great, if I could), but, as you can see on the list, at the RIPE meetings and other points where anti abuse people meet: people that have to deal with abuse every day want the best systems to direct abuse reports to the responsible people. Even most admins are very thankful, when they receive abuse reports quick as possible to prevent more abuse originating from their own, but abused resources. So: there is an interest in an up-to-date database from the community or at least a part of the community. And there is also a very understandable need to protect private data as well. Currently its all mixed up and Tobias RFC is still not in place, that will finally make it possible to protect private data, whenever the object owner wants it and still publish abuse details.
and it's e.g. my and probably many others' interest that ncc can coordinate to make ip work.
Sure.
what you are calling for - no matter what you call it - doesn't affect this coordination task. what you are calling for essentially also isn't a working db (it works, and you are free to talk to people to ask them to change their objects according to your ideas),
Thank you that you allow me to present my opinions and ideas here, didnt know, that Im allowed to do that on this list until now ...
but making ripe some sort of police-substitute,
Not at all, I dont see RIPE NCC following any specific abuse issues like a detective (well, not yet), they have no call to do this, probably no legal background or whatever what you need to play policemen. But: RIPE NCC has a contract wich forces them to store, maintain and publish this database, as far as I can see. And the NCC is also urged to do this in the best and most accurate way, but they simply dont. The database is mixing private with needed public data, gives access to this or that data in a strangly controlled method (objects owner should be allowed to protect there private data from all access, if they want or need to and should not have to hope on a maximum-of-3000-queries-per-day blacklist-stupid-kind-of-protection and abuse data should be released to the public without any restriction), the database is incomplete, not following the own guidelines and contains a lot, I mean, really a lot of old not updated data. Funny that google can present us the text of all webpages easily and up-to-date including all changes during the last 5 minutes, but the NCC never managed to clean the database up during the last years ? And never tried to.
and forcing everybody to follow your strange ideas which are not ripe-business.
Whats strange about a database with correct data ? If there is no mandate to have accurate data in this database, well, then you can shut it down completely (there is nothing worse than old data).
but being an enlightened (errm - i mean that french thing, you know, don't mistake this for hybris, please :) ) netizen, data economy btw is a real interest for me (actually it's the law)...
maybe sbdy from ncc has an estimate on introducing a refer attribute in inet*num objects. i guess this should effectively lead to a technically less complex, as more streamlined, db.
When is the mandatory abuse-c coming ? And will the NCC check the email addresses at least with some minor technical methods (like checking syntax, MX records, availability of the mailserver). Its law in Germany (and I think common sense in the world), that newsletter owner should only mail to users that double-opt-in, so whats so complicated to test the email addresses with an email including a link, that needs to be clicked ? Doing that NCC would have done, whats technical possible and proudly present a database, they have checked. Whoever wants to hide, still can hide and ignore mail, but the NCC would be save from any blame. Somebody asked me today, if there are whatever entities that could put some pressure on abuse friendly ISPs and I said no. Maybe we should publish the data we collect here (simply to protect our customers from abuse). Do you want to know the provider with the most contacts without any email address ? Or the ISPs with perfect abuse contacts leading to a non-responsive mailserver ? Full mailboxes ? And finally: whats about the amount of abuse reports we had to generate for IPs you are responsible for ? Public available and accessible for everybody ? Maybe we should invent an AS-based ranking, others could use via DNS as blacklist based on the amount of spam we received from any AS ... But we had this discussion already a few month ago, we all know where consol.net stands here ... I dont like to repeat myself. Kind regards, Frank
regards,
Chris
-- Mit freundlichen Gruessen, -- PHADE Software - PowerWeb http://www.powerweb.de Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast mailto:frank@powerweb.de Schinkelstrasse 17 fon: +49 33200 52920 14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany fax: +49 33200 52921 ======================================================================
Frank Gadegast wrote: [...]
Funny that google can present us the text of all webpages easily and up-to-date including all changes during the last 5 minutes, but the NCC never managed to clean the database up during the last years ? And never tried to.
This is nonsense. The RIPE NCC does the database clean-ups that there is a consensus for it to do. Look at the RIPE Database WG mailing list archives for recent announcements about recent activity. You really need to develop a consensus in the community first. The RIPE NCC as a secretariat will implement the changes there is a consensus for, not just random ideas people discuss or smart ideas staff have. Regards, Leo
[...]
You really need to develop a consensus in the community first [...]
The constant fallback on 'consensus' is a) the root cause of RIPE [NCC]s inertia and b) in cases like this sadly one of its most valued principles and thus unchangeable. Catch-22, no action, no change. I consider RIPE, more than anyting, a democracy. Alexis de Tocqueville has written some excellent work on the dangers of democracies. “In America, the majority draws a formidable circle around thought. Inside those limits, the writer is free; but unhappiness awaits him if he dares to leave them. It is not that he has to fear an auto-da-fe, but he is the butt of moritifications of all kinds of persecutions every day.” QED. Pepijn +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Disclaimer Dit e-mailbericht kan vertrouwelijke informatie bevatten of informatie die is beschermd door een beroepsgeheim. Indien dit bericht niet voor u is bestemd, wijzen wij u erop dat elke vorm van verspreiding, vermenigvuldiging of ander gebruik ervan niet is toegestaan. Indien dit bericht blijkbaar bij vergissing bij u terecht is gekomen, verzoeken wij u ons daarvan direct op de hoogte te stellen via tel.nr 070 315 3500 of e-mail mailto:mail@opta.nl en het bericht te vernietigen. Dit e-mailbericht is uitsluitend gecontroleerd op virussen. OPTA aanvaardt geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor de feitelijke inhoud en juistheid van dit bericht en er kunnen geen rechten aan worden ontleend. This e-mail message may contain confidential information or information protected by professional privilege. If it is not intended for you, you should be aware that any distribution, copying or other form of use of this message is not permitted. If it has apparently reached you by mistake, we urge you to notify us by phone +31 70 315 3500 or e-mail mailto:mail@opta.nl and destroy the message immediately. This e-mail message has only been checked for viruses. The accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of the information provided cannot be guaranteed. OPTA expressly disclaims any responsibility in relation to the information in this e-mail message. No rights can be derived from this message.
I consider RIPE, more than anyting, a democracy. Alexis de Tocqueville has written some excellent work on the dangers of democracies. “In America, the majority draws a formidable circle around thought. Inside those limits, the writer is free; but unhappiness awaits him if he dares to leave them. It is not that he has to fear an auto-da-fe, but he is the butt of moritifications of all kinds of persecutions every day.”
"Brian Nisbet" wrote the following on 11/04/2012 13:13:
Chris,
"Chris" wrote the following on 11/04/2012 11:03:
On 04/10/2012 05:18 PM, Joe St Sauver wrote:
Maintenance of the database documenting who's been allocated/assigned space is *core* to RIPE's mission.
simply wrong. ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error.
http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/ncc/functions
Specifically the development and maintenance of the RIPE DB. Once all of v4 space is allocated (soon now, soon), the primary job of the NCC and the other four RIRs will be keeping a good registry. I do speak for the NCC, but a substantial amount of the narrative recently has been around keeping that registry up to date and, indeed, attempting to find new and interesting ways of making sure the members put the right data in the right place.
As has been correctly pointed out, I managed to leave out a negative above. I do *not* speak for the NCC. Sorry for any confusion that may have caused. Brian.
Maintenance of the database documenting who's been allocated/assigned space is *core* to RIPE's mission.
simply wrong. ripe's core is allocation. that's what they do. your mission is your private error. Well NRO and ICANN may not agree : http://costarica43.icann.org/meetings/sanjose2012/presentation-raa-update-12...
RIPE is clearly quoted in the organization involved in improving whois accuracy. Well, it is quoted «RIPE NCC conducts monthly reviews of about 50 Whois records resulting in 500-600 annual so called ‘audits’» ... it looks like a pretty more adequate solution than the one of the LACNIC, indeed. 2012/04/12 ... it is not obsolete news I presume ? Cheers, -- Jul
Hello all, Just to clarify some points: - Everything that RIPE NCC Registration Services does for a member is accurately reflected in the RIPE Database. Our registry of allocations made to members and member's organisation information is always in sync with the RIPE Database. In fact, in this case RIPE Database objects are secondary to our core registration files. So, as an example for the resources that are allocated by the RIPE NCC, the data is as accurate as we can contractually expect from our members. Our members are subject to our random audits and our core registry data quality is evaluated regularly. All of this is reflected in the RIPE Database. - The RIPE Database is also a public and open database. For example, sub-assignments made by our members to their customers might be maintained by the customer. This means that there are records in the RIPE Database that are not maintained by the RIPE NCC. Those records are only subject to our automatic data clean-up processes. - The RIPE NCC performs the automatic database clean-ups as they have been agreed by the community. - To emphasise again, the RIPE NCC is the secretariat for the RIPE community, so if the community reaches consensus on a policy -for example, to have automatic technical checks on the validity of email addresses- then we will implement it. - I also observed some technical suggestions about changes to the behavior of the RIPE Database, including the implementation of mechanisms like referrals. I would suggest discussing these subjects on the RIPE Database Working Group mailing list. If consensus is reached on any change, we will implement the change. I hope this clarifies some of the concerns raised on the list. Kind regards, Kaveh. --- Kaveh Ranjbar RIPE NCC Database Group Manager
participants (11)
-
Brian Nisbet -
Chris -
Chris Heinze -
Frank Gadegast -
Joe St Sauver -
julien tayon -
Kaveh Ranjbar -
Leo Vegoda -
russ＠consumer.net -
Suresh Ramasubramanian -
Vissers, Pepijn