July 2000 - db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

<auto-dbm@ripe.net> is slow this afternoon.
by RIPE Database Administration 17 May '18

17 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

PGPKEY Reminder
by gerald＠merit.edu 27 Jul '00

27 Jul '00

On 7/30/00 between 5 AM - 8 AM EDT Merit will convert from 'PGP-FROM' to 'PGPKEY' authentication as described in RFC 2726. All maintainer object 'PGP-FROM' instances will be converted to a 'PGPKEY' instance and a 'key-cert' object will be created for each unique 'PGPKEY' instance. After the conversion all public keys used for signing DB submissions will be visible in the registry as 'key-cert' objects. Registering public keys allows users to verify a maintainer's identity and to submit, update and maintain their own public keys like any other DB object. Normal PGP signing of DB submissions will continue to work exactly as before the conversion. The conversion should be seamless to our DB user community and no action is required. Merit has sent email to all users who will be affected by the conversion. The new 'PGPKEY' scheme makes it easier for users to integrate PGP signing into their DB update process. It is our wish that into the future all registry users will PGP sign their DB submissions. Please see www.radb.net/docs/keyfaq.html for additional information on the conversion process and tutorial information regarding the use of 'PGPKEY' authentication. Please consult RFC 2726 for the authoritative specification. IRRd team --Gerald Winters

1 0

***Announcement: Merit to convert to 'PGPKEY' authentication (RFC 2726)
by gerald＠merit.edu 18 Jul '00

18 Jul '00

On 7/30/00 between 5 AM - 8 AM EDT Merit will convert from 'PGP-FROM' to 'PGPKEY' authentication as described in RFC 2726. All maintainer object 'PGP-FROM' instances will be converted to a 'PGPKEY' instance and a 'key-cert' object will be created for each unique 'PGPKEY' instance. After the conversion all public keys used for signing DB submissions will be visible in the registry as 'key-cert' objects. Registering public keys allows users to verify a maintainer's identity and to submit, update and maintain their own public keys like any other DB object. Normal PGP signing of DB submissions will continue to work exactly as before the conversion. The conversion should be seamless to our DB user community and no action is required. Merit will send email to all users who will be affected by the conversion. The notice will give users a chance to remove their PGP references if (for whatever reason) they do not wish to take part in the new PGP authentication scheme. The new 'PGPKEY' scheme makes it easier for users to integrate PGP signing into their DB update process. It is our wish that into the future all registry users will PGP sign their DB submissions. Please see www.radb.net/docs/keyfaq.html for additional information on the conversion process and tutorial information regarding the use of 'PGPKEY' authentication. Please consult RFC 2726 for the authoritative specification. IRRd team --Gerald Winters

1 0

New object
by Stephen Burley 11 Jul '00

11 Jul '00

Hi I have a quick question has any ever thought of creating a company object, which is much the same as a person object but it means that any range of IP's assigned to a company will easily be traced. Making it easier to find the total amount IP space assigned to a company/org , which frankly at the moment is impossable. Regards -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stephen Burley "If patience is a virtue, and ignorance is bliss, UUNET EMEA Hostmaster you can have a pretty good life Stephenb(a)uk.uu.net if you're stupid and willing to wait" ------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 6

Duplicate mails
by NCC local-ir list Moderator 07 Jul '00

07 Jul '00

Dear subscribers, Please notice that we are experiencing some strange mail behaviour at the moment. The previous mail from Mr Henning Brauer seems to have been re-sent to the lists in error. We are not sure of the cause yet. Before replying to what may seem like an old thread, please check the sent date. We will endeavour to prevent any more of these mails leaking through. Regards, John Crain Head of Internal Services

1 0

RE: a few matters about security and consistency
by adrian.pauling＠bt.com 06 Jul '00

06 Jul '00

Dear All, Issue 1 is of interest to anyone involved with RIPE database. It must be in the RIPE communities interest to keep data as up to date and accurate as possible. Auditing is a resource hungry task and a pain in the asynchronous port, but is necessary to maintain and improve the quality of the data within the database. Is it acceptable for RIPE database to periodically, say once a year, to contact via e-mail each person and role object? The objective would be to ensure the person / role object are up to date. If there was no response, perhaps within a 4 week period, any associated maintainer object could be used to identify other people who could up date the records. If there is no maintainer, then a RIPE Hostmaster maintainer or notify attribute could be added to the record - and mark the record as out of date as appropriate . This would be a small overhead to everyone who is on the RIPE database that would ensure and improve the integrity of data within the database, for a piece of work on the database. From below, there is a possibility of up to 10 % of records on the database being inaccurate. That can not be an acceptable situation. Issue 2 is beyond the direct scope of the LIR-WG. However, I recollect that at RIPE 35 there was a suggestion of adding a new database record to the RIPE database, to clearly identify those networks which had a CERT team - has any progress been made? Regards, Adrian F Pauling :-)NEL2C Internet Protocol Manager acd Information Systems Engineering Technical Architecture AFP1-RIPE / AFP-ARIN / AFP25-InterNIC * adrian.pauling(a)bt.com * +44 19 2685 1992 / +44 78 0290 4877 British Telecommunications plc Registered Office 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ Registered in England no 1800000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Lastdrager [SMTP:mark@pine.nl] > Sent: 05 July 2000 21:53 > To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net > Cc: cert(a)pine.nl > Subject: a few matters about security and consistency > > Hi, > > There are two matters I want to discuss, which are related from my point > of view. > > Yesterday, ons of our hosts was attacked (Denial of Service). The attacker > was using the DNS DOS described in > http://www.ciac.org/ciac/bulletins/j-063.shtml (AUSCERT AL-1999.004) for > this. > > The used attack in short: Small DNS queries are sent from the attacker > to each of the DNS servers. These queries contain the spoofed IP address > of the target. The DNS servers respond to the small query with a large > response. These responses are routed to the target, causing link > congestion and possible denial of Internet connectivity. > > This morning, we took our tcpdump logs of the attacks, and built a script > which queried the Ripe database for the admins of the abused > ('man-in-the-middle') networks. We got almost 900 unique email adresses > out of this, to whom we sent a clear email describing what happened and > asking for any logs or other usable information to find out who the > attacker is. We we astonished how many people reacted with usefull > information, we are still investigating right now. > > It pointed out we were not the only one attacked, it now looks like the > attacker (or attackers ofcourse) is abusing most of the 194.x network to > amplify the DNS requests pointing at a lot of Dutch hosts and even some > in the USA. > > Ok, that was the scary part ;-) If you operate 1 or more DNS servers, > please read the AUSCERT document and apply the workarounds they mention > there (only allow your nameserver(s) to answer to queries from trusted > hosts and/or zones you are authoritive for). If will really help from > people abusing your network and filling up your pipe(s). > > Matter 1: > > What scared me was the great amount of bounced mail we got back from the > 900 mails we sent. I think at least 10% did not exist. Besides that we got > a lot of replies like 'hey don't bother me, I don't work there > anymore'. Why doesn't RIPE test periodically if email adresses still work? > > > Matter 2: > > Like I said, we got a lot of useful replies and they all more or less > contained the same information. People had full, non-working internet > links for days because of the attacks and were very happy that we pointed > them to the 'Auscert workaround' because now they've closed their DNS'es > the traffic (and business!) goes back to normal. Because of the info we > got, we are -while I write this- trying to trace back to the origin of the > spoofed packets. > > I think it would be very helpful if there was a mailinglist where European > operators could discuss this kind of incidents, like the USA people do at > the Securityfocus mailinglist > (http://www.securityfocus.com/templates/archive.pike?list=75). I think the > introduction at http://www.securityfocus.com/forums/incidents/intro.html > would describe the use of such a list very well. Incidents like this DOS > which affect a lot of European networks could be stopped much quicker, and > if you can contact your fellow operators you don't have to waste expensive > time trying to track down those stupid scriptkids (believe me.. it takes a > lot of time ;-)). Ofcourse things like virii, talk about used exploits > etc. are on-topic and interesting too. > > Like I said: time is money, so we set up the list > euro-incidents(a)security.nl already. Anybody can subscribe at > http://www.security.nl/mailman/listinfo/euro-incidents. > > Thanks for your time, > > Mark Lastdrager > Pine Internet > > -- > email: mark(a)lastdrager.nl :: ML1400-RIPE :: tel. +31-70-3111010 > http://www.pine.nl :: RIPE RegID nl.pine :: fax. +31-70-3111011 > PGP key ID 92BB81D1 :: Dutch security news @ http://security.nl > Today's excuse: We only support a 28000 bps connection. > > > > >

1 0

Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 03 Jul '00

03 Jul '00

----- Forwarded by Henning Brauer/BSWS/DE on 30.06.00 13:16 ----- Henning Brauer To: "Sabine Dolderer/Denic" <dolderer(a)denic.de> 30.06.00 13:14 cc: Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects (Document link: Henning Brauer) a) agree. But the Maintainer-Scheme works really good, so I do nao see any reason for changing this. b) Just one Example (now): bss004:~ # whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE Connection refused; server has reached maximum number of clients. Anonther: dns.denic.de didn't answered authoritative for de-Domains Yesterday evening... c) No One would sya anything if you would just take the ripe-solution so we had to change email-adress for updates. Even other changes, like source: and perhaps phone, fax and so in beeing optional, would be acceptable. But there is no doc how updates will be made! d) customers do agree to this when putting ther data in the DB. As I said before: Just make phone and fax optional, everbody will agree. If it would be true what you are saying here, even Telephone books would be illegal. e) just compare whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE with whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. I'd like to show you this here, but DENIC's whois-Server is not reponding. The problem is that if you di an whois-query for an .de-Domain (in most cases using one of the web-interface) you'll see the crippeled data from ther denic whois-db. f) means there will be costs? You do not answer the question here. g) answer? Thanks for participationg this discussion. But why was this discussion not possible before doing the move?? As said before: RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-list ARE closed communities, the db-wg(a)ripe.net would have been the right place. Greetings Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE "Sabine Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de c" cc: db-wg(a)ripe.net, info(a)denic.de, lir-wg(a)ripe.net, robert(a)martin-legene.dk <dolderer@den Subject: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects ic.de> 30.06.00 12:44 Hello, On 30.06.00 11:07 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > thats not really the point of our critics. > a) changes only be made by members???? as every DE-domainowner is our customer and we are responisble to him about the security of his domainname we must assure that changes are made in a verifyable and accountable way. It is important that there is a documented responsibility. > b) technical solution - RIPE's solutions are working really good, DENIC's > past solutions are poor no comment. > c) change in interfaces not acceptable changes in interfaces are sometimes necessary. But I am with you that this should happen very rarely and should be prepared very well and people should be informed very soon -- but we tried to make all this. > d) contact info's, especially phone and fax, are REALLY important for the > hostmasters to inform each other about technical probs. If this could be > against German's laws, just make these fields optional. we are only allowed to publish these things if the custoumer have signed that he allows the publishing. Currently we think that from nearly none of the persons in the RIPE-DB this allowence is there. For the future we plan to let the people the choice to publish these data. > e) putting so named "non-operational data" or "test data" which is > incomplete and partly incorrect in production systems (it IS in > productionis - just do an whoi-query...) is not acceptable sorry I don't understand these point. Maybe you can show me an example of these "test data". > f) plans making life for non-members harder -> DENIC tries to get more > payin' members???? As we are working on a costrecovery base (non-profit) more members don't means automatically more income. But surely are we are interested in organisations taking the responsibitlity and sharing the risk to run the German Registry as a self regulating body for the benefits of the German Internet Community. > g) plans to charge for person: and role: records? > h) to be continued... Regards Sabine > > pls see http://denicpetition.bsws.de > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info(a)bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "Sabine > Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > c" cc: db-wg(a)ripe.net, info(a)denic.de, > lir-wg(a)ripe.net, robert(a)martin-legene.dk > <dolderer@den Subject: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: > Deletion of .de domain objects > ic.de> > > 30.06.00 > 10:39 > > > > > > > Hello, > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > have (or even must) done the migration. > > First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the > past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. > > Problems: > > There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the > RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain > their database for this amount of objects. > > There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for > domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or > assist us in this kind of service. > > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs > and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these > discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from > the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped > very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually > there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central > entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE > referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg > from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see > rfc2782 for a documentation) > > Solution > > So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the > domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed > the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it > was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there > should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. > > Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? > > I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we > are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with > the applicant. > > Whats necessary concerning a domainname? > > We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no > necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address > because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the > only thing you need. > > Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a > necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses > and so we will implement this very soon. > > I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am > really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people > felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make > them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and > you see know the other side a little bit better, > > Regards Sabine > > > On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > > once again in english: > > > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think > on > > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no > domain > > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us > could > > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be > a > > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the > role:s) > > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) > is > > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info > is > > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german > domain! > > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the > domain > > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that > even > > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for > us! > > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is > not > > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > > back a few years, please. > > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC > or > > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop > our > > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > > > This can not be the way to our future. > > > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your > DENIC > > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > > board... > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > Robert > > Martin-Legène To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > > <robert@martin- cc: > > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: > Deletion > of > > .de domain objects > > Sent by: > > r(a)jenslyn.nisse > > .dk > > > > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo. > > > > This is a list in English. > > > > What did you write? > > > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC sähe ich sehr > > sehr > > > gerne. > > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-Lösung, und wenn ich so an > die > > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > > Die Lösung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten > von > > uns > > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > > Arbeiten. Mit einer Änderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > > DENIC-oder-nicht können wir wohl alle leben, mit völlig neuen Formaten > > und > > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > > nicht. Das DENIC wäre gut beraten, die RIPE-Lösung zu übernehmen. > > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > > unverantwortlich. > > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen über eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces für > whois > > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > > beschrieben, was für Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer für was zu > > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > > alle, > > > zum Teil unnützen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > > unnötigerweise zusätzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung > der > > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ändert und Infos rausfallen lässt, ist > eine > > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > > Arbeitsweise > > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank > liegen. > > Bei > > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise für > > uns > > > nichts ändert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh übers DENIC oder > > deren > > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle > direct > > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn plötzlich > > alle > > > Änderungen nur noch über DENIC-Mitglieder möglich sind - für uns als > > > nicht-Mitglied also nur über nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind > und > > > eine automatisierbare Möglichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > > Land, > > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein völlig neues Format rauslaufen. > > Folge > > > also? Wir müssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > <henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de> > > > Center" cc: <owner-loca-ir(a)ripe.net> > > > <ncc@mediasca Subject: AW: AW: Deletion > of > > .de domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie wärs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC > Maintainerlose > > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, > wie > > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > > weia. > > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon darüber gemutmasst, dass > > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder überhaupt Änderungen > > > vornehmen können und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer@bsmail.de] > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon > bemerkt > > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > > Kram. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > <henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de> > > > Center" cc: > > > <ncc@mediasca Subject: AW: Deletion of > .de > > > domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat > Daten > > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gekürzter Form > > > übernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > > > changed: test(a)nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > > Übernahme? > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: owner-local-ir(a)ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir@ripe.net]Im > Auftrag > > > von henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > > An: lir-wg(a)ripe.net; db-wg(a)ripe.net; local-ir(a)ripe.net > > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > > roles > > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > > Administratio To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net, > > > db-wg(a)ripe.net, local-ir(a)ripe.net > > > n cc: > > > <ripe-dbm@rip Subject: Deletion of .de > > > domain > > > objects > > > e.net> > > > Sent by: > > > owner-lir-wg@ > > > ripe.net > > > > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > > European Summer Time. > > > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net. > > > > > > -- > > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > > > > > > > Sabine Dolderer > DENIC eG > Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 > D-60329 Frankfurt > > eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de > Fon: +49 69 27235 0 > Fax: +49 69 27235 235 > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

2 1

Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 03 Jul '00

03 Jul '00

Hi, I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles had also "DENIC" as source. But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE RIPE Database Administratio To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net, db-wg(a)ripe.net, local-ir(a)ripe.net n cc: <ripe-dbm@rip Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects e.net> Sent by: owner-lir-wg@ ripe.net 29.06.00 12:45 -------- Dear Colleauges, We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central European Summer Time. If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net. -- Filippo Portera

17 22