Ronald, On 04/02/2021 02.22, Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg wrote:
I mean seriously, who designed these questions?
The RIPE Database Requirements Task Force, with support from the RIPE NCC. This task force includes me, although I am speaking only for myself here. My feeling is that any set of good requirements is the minimal set of functionality needed to do something. As such, everything that we put forward as a requirement needs to be justified. The survey is an attempt to understand how important - if at all - various things that are currently stored and published in the RIPE Database are to the RIPE community. Your opinion that the RIPE Database should contain and make public lots of information is clear. I think that our job as the task force is to try to understand and document what your use cases are and whether or not those reach the level of one or more requirements for what should be in the database and whether it should be public. Every tightening of security or privacy makes life more difficult for someone. Several years ago the shift from unencrypted HTTP to encrypted HTTPS was problematic for vendors who sold products or services that analyzed this traffic to help companies secure or otherwise understand their networks. The current shift from unencrypted DNS to DNS-over-TLS or DNS-over-HTTPS is problematic for companies that snoop on DNS traffic to check for bots or other hacked systems accessing their command-and-control networks. So I recognize that the parts of your work that involve getting data out of WHOIS databases is going to be harder if that information is not there. Possibly your work will be impossible. It is understandable that this would make you a bit angry or afraid. Even so, not every current use or potential use of the RIPE Database is necessarily something that must be supported going forward. Note that the task force has already published an incomplete draft of the requirements, so you can see what we have in mind: https://www.ripe.net/resolveuid/ec75a6eb21684150bbcf6cd53917629c Also note that this is the *beginning* of the process of changing the database, so nothing the task force recommends is to be considered the final word. Any changes will go through the usual RIPE policy development process (PDP) in an appropriate working group (probably either Database or Routing, but possibly Address Policy), so there will be plenty of time to discuss specific proposals. Cheers, -- Shane