September 1999 - db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

<auto-dbm@ripe.net> is slow this afternoon.
by RIPE Database Administration 16 May '18

16 May '18

Dear Colleagues, Because of a very high level of use this afternoon, the response time of <auto-dbm(a)ripe.net> is longer than normal. I have made contact with those who are responsible and I expect the situation to improve as the machine works through the queue. Please be patient. Obviously we at the RIPE NCC Database Group are continuously working to make the performance of the database as good as possible. However, we cannot make improvements in zero time. We thank you for your co-operation up to now and we ask for your continued co-operation so that everyone receives the best possible service. If you have anymore questions, please contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Ambrose Magee ____________________________ RIPE Database Administration.

2 2

object definitions
by Chris Ottrey 04 Oct '99

04 Oct '99

Hello, Work here at the NCC on the Re-Implementation Project (RIP), is well under way. We have been looking closely at the existing definitions of objects incorporating them into our new design. We thought that now might be a good time for getting ideas on any changes in the object definitions that the wg would like to see. Eg. - "mandatory" mnt_by field in domain - "mandatory" mnt_by field in inetnum - "mandatroy" mnt_by field in person (instead of the current - "optional".) (Eg. to provide some sort of indication of how much protection users have against someone else deleting all their domains. Some users may not even realize that it is possible.) Existing object definitions can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/db/reimp/design/er/er_whois.html Chris. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= A ,-._|\ Chris Ottrey \_ / Oz \ At work in Amsterdam, \_,--._/ ottrey(a)ripe.net +31 20 535 4444 -=-=-=-=-=-v-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

2 1

Top 100 maintainers list
by RIPE Database Administration 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

1 0

Maintainer report...
by Paul Rolland 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Hello, Just one thing I'd like to point out : it seems that the database used to create the maintainer report is not sync with the 'live' db... I've been doing some deletion on Sunday, and got the Ack on monday Morning. Looking at the report generated this morning, refreshing, updating the pages again and again, I can still find the same 'mistakes' which are not in the live db (the update has really been processed). Am i missing something ? Regards, Paul Paul Rolland, rol(a)oleane.net France Telecom Oleane/Direction Technique/Directeur France Telecom Oleane/Technical Direction/Director -- Please no MIME, I don't read it - Pas de MIME, je ne le lis pas Please no HTML, I'm not a navigator - Pas d'HTML, je ne suis pas un navigateur "Some people dreams of success... while others wake up and work hard at it"

2 2

We think it may be interesting...
by Joao Luis Silva Damas 20 Sep '99

20 Sep '99

Hi, we have just made available some more operational information online for your convenience. Please see http://www.ripe.net/db/mrtg/whois.html Hope you find it useful. It uses the great mrtg tool. Best regards, Joao Damas RIPE DB Group manager RIPE NCC

2 1

report on nic handle reuse in the RIPE DB
by Joao Luis Silva Damas 17 Sep '99

17 Sep '99

Dear all, for your reading pleasure :-) This issue came up during the last RIPE meeting. Best regards, Joao Damas RIPE DB Group Manager RIPE NCC

4 3

RE: object definitions
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 16 Sep '99

16 Sep '99

>Subject: object definitions > >Hello, Hi Chris! [ nice to meet you! ] >Work here at the NCC on the Re-Implementation Project (RIP), >is well under way. Cute acronym, but don't get near Routing with that one :-) >We have been looking closely at the existing definitions of objects >incorporating them into our new design. > >We thought that now might be a good time for getting ideas on any >changes in the object definitions that the wg would like to see. > >Eg. > - "mandatory" mnt_by field in domain From a DB-WG's point of view, change requests for this one should be coming from the users of the Domain-Registry. I'd feel much more at ease if the request to change things would come from / at least be endorsed by the relevant WG (TLD-WG, probably?) > - "mandatory" mnt_by field in inetnum Likewise, just s/Domain-Registry/IP-Registry/ (LIR-WG?) > - "mandatory" mnt_by field in person This is probably something DB-WG can't push away to somewhere else :-) >(instead of the current - "optional".) > >(Eg. to provide some sort of indication of how much protection > users have against someone else deleting all their domains. Some > users may not even realize that it is possible.) In case we want to work on the awareness (first, even before deploying the new SW?), we could think about putting some sort of "(weakest/used) protection indicator" into the ack-messages? Something anlong the lines of: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following objects were processed. New OK: [inetnum] 193.170.2.0 - 193.170.2.255 protection: NONE Modified: [person] Spider Tarantula Woman (SPT1-RIPE) protection: ACONET-LIR-MNT, PGPKEY-DBC579D4 New OK: [domain] crack.ac.at protection: MAIL-FROM .*(a)cc\.univie\.ac\.at ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Maybe this is not a bad idea, anyway? >Existing object definitions can be found at: >http://www.ripe.net/db/reimp/design/er/er_whois.html > > >Chris. > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > A ,-._|\ Chris Ottrey > \_ / Oz \ At work in Amsterdam, > \_,--._/ ottrey(a)ripe.net +31 20 535 4444 >-=-=-=-=-=-v-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Thanks for bringing this up, and could the other WG chairs please indicate their preference for where to deal with that? TIA, Wilfried. PS: Chris, I hope your question indicates that the NCC is already very far down the road with implemenetation and testing, rather than fixing that very early on for whatever reason? I hope the new SW design still allows for modifying these things by way of some site config facility? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Vienna University : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : RIPE-DB (&NIC) Handle: WW144 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : PGP public key ID 0xF0ACB369 __________________________________________________________________________

1 0

1. Draft, proposed agenda DB-WG meeting RIPE-34, Thu.,Sept.23'99
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 16 Sep '99

16 Sep '99

Attached please find the 1. draft for a proposed DB-WG agenda! As usual, additional input and comments are solicited! Please be prepared to see an update to that being circulated on the DB-WG list between now and just before the meeting. Looking forward to see many of you in Amsterdam, next week, Wilfried. Note to <Meeting(a)RIPE.NET> and <Webmaster(a)RIPE.NET>: Please use this version for the hand-outs and for the meeting web page. Thank you! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Vienna University : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : RIPE-DB (&NIC) Handle: WW144 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : PGP public key ID 0xF0ACB369 __________________________________________________________________________ Proposed Agenda for the Database Working Group Meeting RIPE-33, September 1999, Amsterdam, NL 1. Draft [ Note: for any updates between now and before the WG meeting, watch the DB WG Mailing List, please! ] A. Administrative stuff (Wilfried Woeber, chair) B. RIPE DB, operational update (RIPE NCC) C. DB SW Re-implementation (RIPE NCC) D. DB Consistency Project - presentation ((RIPE NCC) - discussion E. Birth of, and Life after the release of The New SW - migration/implementation planning (if any :-) - next development steps W. Do we need/want a DB WG review/re-structuring? - future topics of interest (workplan/charter?) - I/O with other WGs - logistics X. Report(s) Y. Input from other WGs - t.b.d. Z. AOB ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ WW, 16-SEP-1999 13:17:19

1 0

Re: RIPE handles delay
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 15 Sep '99

15 Sep '99

Dear Vesa! => response to updates more directly related to the RIPE DB intended purpose => while still ensuring that others not so directly related will get => processed. = =This tactful comment probably means a turn to the right direction. =But I wish it was said loudly and clearly, maybe even as a complete =change in DB usage policy. We pay for address registration services, =please take the domain (non-rev-dns-related) objects elsewhere. To statr with I'd like to assure you that we are (sometimes painfully) aware of the issue(s) you'r point fingers at. Quite a bit of things have been achived already to allow us to move in the right direction in due time: Technically: the NCC already has implemented the WG-approved refer: attribute to allow referrals to "remote" autoritative servers for domain: objects. This is already being use by (a few) TLD registries, others are working towards that end. Logistics: CENTR was formed within the framework of the RIPE NCC quite a while ago to deal with TLD activites (or DNS issues in general). CENTR has meanwhile been incoprorated as a legal entity of it's own, and moved office to the UK. RIPE discussions: we have already (recently) started to discuss (both informally amongst the WG chairs, as well as within the various WG meetings) the issues with co-locating different registries within a single database environment (i.e. the IP-Registry, Routing-Registry, DNS-Registry). These issues are (amongst others) . authority for data and responsibility for data quality . access patterns ie.e. (updates vs. consumers, privacy, copyright) . providing operational resources As an aside, you are correct in stating that the NCC's main objective rests with the IP-Address, including reverseDNS and Routing Registry activites. But, at the same time, the creation of and support for CENTR and the DNS-related activites was agreed by the RIPE community and there was (still is?) a contract in place between the NCC and CENTR to have CENTR contribute equitably to the NCC's operational costs. I'm looking forward to continue this thread of discussion (within the DB-WG framework or somewhere else) as well as to corrections and amendments by the RIPE community and WG chairs, and/or from NCC staff. Best regards, and thanks for bringing this up (again) for consideration! Wilfried Woeber DataBase WG chair. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Vienna University : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : RIPE-DB (&NIC) Handle: WW144 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : PGP public key ID 0xF0ACB369 __________________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: RIPE handles delay
by Joao Luis Silva Damas 14 Sep '99

14 Sep '99

Hi, we have been having a lot of trouble lately here at the NCC. Apart from some HW problems, that are now fixed, we are still receiving updates at a rate and in a combination that the DB can't presently handle in a fast way. All messages sent are queued and processed in turn. We are working on optimizing the software to handle these updates faster. Also we are going to deploy a queue control system to ensure a prompt response to updates more directly related to the RIPE DB intended purpose while still ensuring that others not so directly related will get processed. Currently we are processing the mails that were causing the problems with a lower priority to ensure an adequate service to the community. I will be presenting an in depth report on the situation next week at the RIPE meeting (DB wg). Shall the TLD wg also be interested in the some sort of presentation or overview I will be glad to present it. We have been reporting on the situation to this and other RIPE wgs and shall continue to do so. At this moment the situation is such that messages are being processed as in the good old days :-) Best regards, Joao Damas RIPE DB Group Manager RIPE NCC On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Alfredo E. Cotroneo wrote: > Hi, > > For the last ten days or so we have noticed that replies for a new contact > handle to auto-dbm(a)ripe.net is taking much more than the usual 2-5 minutes > as it used to be in the good old times ;-) Although we request only a few > handles per month, a relly from RIPE takes now 10-20 hrs or more in some > cases, regardless of the time (day or night, week or week-end) when the > request is sent out. > > I have heard of some kind of explanation related to SW/HW upgrades at RIPE > and huge requests of handles being queued by some provider a few days ago, > however, can someone at RIPE tell if the situation is going to be solved > soon and when ? > > Unfortunately this is causing at least an additional 1+ day delay in the > registration of new domains at the Italian NIC, as IT-NIC requests that a > handle exists for each contact before the domain registration form is > submitted. Of course any comment from IT-NIC on how they can modify their > internal procedures to minimize such delays (i.e. by IT-NIC requesting a > new handle to RIPE directly) is also welcome. > > Thanks. > > > -- > Alfredo E. Cotroneo PO Box 11028, 20110, Milano, Italy > Phone: +39-335-214-614 (try first) / +39-02-266-6971 > email: alfredo(a)nexus.org fax: +39-02-706-38151 > >

2 1