- db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

RE: NRTM proposal
by Lu, Ping 11 Mar '02

11 Mar '02

comments followed. > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Vehling [mailto:av@nethead.de] > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 4:01 AM > To: Lu, Ping > Cc: 'Andrei Robachevsky'; Bjorn Danielsson; db-beta(a)ripe.net; > 'db-wg(a)ripe.net'; Dieken, Chris; Beaumont, Dave; Resh, Stephanie; > phil(a)nethead.de > Subject: Re: NRTM proposal > > [snip] > > If receiving a stream with objects considered "non-standard", > or private, all the nrtm client (or the server) has to do > is to filter out objects (and maybe attributes) which are > considered of private nature. The client doesnt need to know > anything about which serial number relates to which object. > (i.e. The serial-numbers must not be in sync between a source > server and the mirror) If you don't care whether the serial-numbers match or not then how can you tell the mirrored data is up-to-date ? > > This can easily be accomplished by creating a perl script > which filters the NRTM ascii stream. > > Actually we are using such a script for synchronizing our > local ip-management ripe-database with the RIPE amsterdam. > > Could you therefore please elaborate on where you are seeing a > problem with the serial-numbers while mirroring? > As I said before if the client can do whatever they want without maintaining the correct serial-numbers then how can you tell the data is up-to-date ? Best Regards. Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net

2 2

RE: NRTM proposal
by Lu, Ping 11 Mar '02

11 Mar '02

Hi, Arnd, comments followed. Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Vehling [mailto:av@nethead.de] > Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 12:45 PM > To: Lu, Ping > Cc: 'Andrei Robachevsky'; Bjorn Danielsson; db-beta(a)ripe.net; > 'db-wg(a)ripe.net' > Subject: Re: NRTM proposal > [snip] > > How about setting up an instance for private objects and one with > standard-objetcs. > Let the one with the private objects synchronize with the standard one > (i.e. per e-mail-script) > As far as RIPE-DB vs. IRRD, RIPE-DB implements IRT object (considered private) but IRRD doesn't. There is always a situation where the standard one need to synchronize with the one with private objects but need to filter out private objects (like RADB mirror from RIPE ). Then internally RIPE NCC will need to mirror the data with IRT to keep the data integrity. > Only standard objects gets exported to the standard-objects > DB. Then let > others mirror > only the instance with the standard objects. The problem is the serial number will increase when you update a private object then when other mirrors get only the standard object the serial number mismatched each other. As regarding to the PERSON object, this is a situation for STANDARD mirroring STANDARD but needs to filter it out also. > > This has also the advantage you dont mix ip-management only data with > routing-registry > relevant data. As you might know Cable&Wireless Europe has modified > version of > the RIPE-DB running which contains only IP-Management data > but no route > objetcs etc. > We choose RIPE-DB software because it does both together while ARIN region use two different databases for Route and IP-Management. And it is a disadvantage for us constantly trying to merge both data together. One thing is RIPE-DB cross-checking between the inetnum object (IP-Management) and the route (routing) object makes it very consistent for the RIPE region. And I considered that an advantage rather than a disadvantage. PS. CW Europe is on a different AS number now but it will merge into AS3561 eventually. > This isnt an ideal solution but it works. The right solution > would be to > establish > distributed route registries and not to mirror each other. > > There is already a RFC out which describes how distributed registries > could work > but i cant find it at the moment, sorry. (Anyone know which > RFC it is?) > Even for a distributed system (like DNS) there is a need for caching (mirrored data) and you still have to put them together at some point.

2 1

RIPE Whois Server version 3.1.0
by RIPE Database Administration 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Dear Colleagues, [Apologies for multiple messages]. The RIPE NCC is pleased to announce the release of Version 3.1.0 of the RIPE Whois server. This software is compliant with both RPSL (RFC-2622) and RPS-Security (RFC-2725). This release adds several user-visible improvements: - New status type for inetnum objects: LIR-PARTITIONED. - New object type, irt, and associated new attributes: "irt:", "mnt-irt:", "irt-nfy:", "signature:", and "encryption:". The RPSL parsing has been totally rewritten. The new mechanism makes adding new classes and attributes much easier. Additionally, many, many bugs have been fixed. Detailed release notes can be found at the following URL: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/software/RELEASE-NOTES-3.1.0 You can download this release by anonymous FTP from the following URL: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/software/ripe-dbase-3.1.0.tar.gz If you do not intend to use the cross-reference files or prefer to build them yourself via "make docs", you can download the source without these files by anonymous FTP from the following URL: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/software/ripe-dbase-3.1.0-nocxref.tar.gz A diff for the 3.1.0 "nocxref" version is also available, if you already have 3.0.2 and would prefer to patch that version instead, at the following URL: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/software/patch-ripe-dbase-3.0.2-nocxref-3.1.0… If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. -- Shane Kerr RIPE NCC

2 1

New Document available: RIPE-238
by RIPE NCC Document Announcement Service 13 Feb '02

13 Feb '02

[Apologies for duplicate mails] New/Revised RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A revised/new document is available from the RIPE document store. Ref: ripe-238 Title: RIPE Database Reference Manual Author: Joao Luis Silva Damas, Andrei Robachevsky Date: 6 February 2002 Format: PS=277479 TXT=124400 Obsoletes: ripe-223 Obsoleted by: Updates: Updated by: Short content description ------------------------- This document is an updated version of the "RIPE Database reference manual" (ripe-223). It describes the functionality of version 3.0 of the RIPE Database that uses the Routing Policy Specification Language to represent all Database objects. It also implements the Routing Policy System Security (RPSS) to provide authorisation mechanisms to enable a higher level of security for Internet Routing Registries (IRR). Accessing the RIPE document store --------------------------------- The RIPE document store is available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The URLs for the new documents on the FTP-server are: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-238.ps PostScript version ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-238.txt plain text version You can also access the RIPE documents in HTML format via WWW. The RIPE Database reference manual is available from the WWW at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/databaseref-manual.html

1 0

Re: Missing mnt-routes in ALLOCATED PA objects
by RIPE Database Administration 12 Feb '02

12 Feb '02

Dear Karsten, Please see Sabrina Waschke's message regarding the issue: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/db-wg/20010701-20020101/msg00099.html If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Engin Gunduz ____________________________ RIPE Database Administration. Karsten Koepp wrote: >Hi all, > >already twice customers of us were not able to update route >records, because RIPE had not included mnt-routes (and mnt-lower) >lines into the inetnum object when allocating a block. >The blocks where we experienced the problem were allocated >in 1996: inetnum: 193.203.96.0 - 193.203.127.255 >and 1999: inetnum: 212.95.64.0 - 212.95.95.255 > >This is not an easy to understand problem for small ISPs dealing >with route objects only now and then. To solve this problem it is >necessary that LIRs send the inetnum object to be updated to >hostmaster(a)ripe.net and RIPE update the object with RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT. >Only then the ISP can update their route records. > >Question: >- Is there a reason for not existing mnt-lower and mnt-routes lines? >- If not, can RIPE update all affected inetnums in an automatic manner? > >This would really help a lot, because manual updates create a lot of >consultancy need from upstream providers (us in this case) and, I guess, >a considerable workload on the RIPE hostmaster team. > >Regards Karsten > >------------------------------------------------------------- >Karsten Koepp >IP Network Planning

1 0

Missing mnt-routes in ALLOCATED PA objects
by Koepp, Karsten 11 Feb '02

11 Feb '02

Hi all, already twice customers of us were not able to update route records, because RIPE had not included mnt-routes (and mnt-lower) lines into the inetnum object when allocating a block. The blocks where we experienced the problem were allocated in 1996: inetnum: 193.203.96.0 - 193.203.127.255 and 1999: inetnum: 212.95.64.0 - 212.95.95.255 This is not an easy to understand problem for small ISPs dealing with route objects only now and then. To solve this problem it is necessary that LIRs send the inetnum object to be updated to hostmaster(a)ripe.net and RIPE update the object with RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT. Only then the ISP can update their route records. Question: - Is there a reason for not existing mnt-lower and mnt-routes lines? - If not, can RIPE update all affected inetnums in an automatic manner? This would really help a lot, because manual updates create a lot of consultancy need from upstream providers (us in this case) and, I guess, a considerable workload on the RIPE hostmaster team. Regards Karsten ------------------------------------------------------------- Karsten Koepp IP Network Planning Lambdanet Communications GmbH (AS13237) Guenther-Wagner-Allee 13 D-30177 Hannover (Germany) Phone +49 (0)511 / 84 88 - 12 55 Fax +49 (0)511 / 84 88 - 12 59 Mobile +49 (0)178 / 3 62 - 12 55 mailto:Karsten.Koepp@lambdanet.net News & Facts on our Website: www.lambdanet.net -------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

RIPE DB down for updates?
by Daniel Roesen 10 Feb '02

10 Feb '02

Hi, http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/mrtg/whois.html it looks like the update processing is halted since yesterday evening... Best regards, Daniel

2 1

New RIPE Database features
by Andrei Robachevsky 07 Feb '02

07 Feb '02

Dear colleagues, [ Apologies for multiple messages ] The new features of the RIPE Database requested by the community are now available in "beta version" on our TEST whois server (http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/testdb.html). The new features are: - the "irt" object (please see my previous announcement at http://www/ripe/mail-archives/db-wg/current/msg00012.html) - the new "status:" value of the inetnum object "LIR-PARTITIONED PA/PI" (please see the original proposal at http://www/ripe/mail-archives/db-wg/20010701-20020101/msg00090.html). You may try these features by - sending your updates to test-dbm(a)ripe.net; - querying the test-whois.ripe.net, port 43. The new version of the software is under heavy testing now and will be put into production shortly after the RIPE meeting. Your comments are appreciated. You may contact the development team directly at dbrip(a)ripe.net. Best regards, Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC

2 4

RE: Database development plans
by Lu, Ping 31 Jan '02

31 Jan '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: David Kessens [mailto:david@IPRG.nokia.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 11:22 PM > To: Lu, Ping > Cc: 'Larry J. Blunk'; db-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: Database development plans > > > > Ping, > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 07:20:47PM -0500, Lu, Ping wrote: > > > > If the mail can be intercepted then a cookie confirmation > > won't make a difference. > > You can forge a mail header without being able to intercept the mail. > > > If the mail can be intercepted then a clear-text password scheme > > won't make a difference. > > You can guess the password without being able to intercept the mail. > > David K. > --- > And CRYPT-PW now is no better than the MAIL-FROM. Both are easy to get thru. But my point is "If the email is not secure then the new proposals (cookie, MD5 or even shadow password) won't achieve their goals". However let's focus on "If the email is secure ..." case now. Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net

1 0

RE: Database development plans
by Lu, Ping 31 Jan '02

31 Jan '02

> > I still feel that MAIL-FROM with cookie confirmation is > considerably > better than "no authentication". I don't see how a cookie is really > any easier to intercept than a password or secret string sent in the > clear. It also doesn't suffer from potential dictionary cracking > attacks. While it is clear that user's will find it more complicated > than the current MAIL-FROM, I could still envisage some > preferring it over passwords/PGP-KEYs. > > I checked out majordomo's cookie confirmation code and found that > the cookie generation uses a hash of a secret string, the user's > email address, and the requested command. Thus the server does not > need to keep any cookie state. One could include a timestamp in the > cookie hash generation and confirmation message to help guard against > replay's. > > Finally, I would imagine that those who are using automatic scripts > would migrate to passwords or (preferably) PGP. > > If the mail can be intercepted then a cookie confirmation won't make a difference. If the mail can be intercepted then a clear-text password scheme won't make a difference. Only if the mail is secure then a cookie or password makes sense. Also a cookie confirmation increases the chance to start a mail storm. >> In my ISI/RPSL/6bone version of the perl server (=not the >> official RIPE version of the perl software) the crypt-pw is indeed not shown upon >> query or in the downloadable database files. This is not a bad idea to shadow the crypted string (then MD5 is not really necessary ). But I think the RIPE-DB server needs some structure changes to support this. >> >> This is clearly a community decision. I would suggest that if MD5 is > > implemented as an additional method, strings bigger than 8 > characters > > are a necessity (and it is really easy to do so with MD5). > The extra > > length makes it really difficult to have dictionary attacks if > > properly used (I mean you can use a file with the complete works of > > shakespeare when generating the MD5 hash) > > If RIPE-DB are going to support different auth functions, why not using PAM to support any kind of PAM modules then ? Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net

2 1