Hi all, In order for ENUM registries to be correctly distinguished in the RIPE NCC database, I want to propose a new organization type to be used in the organization object. Current organization types are: IANA RIR NIR LIR NON-REGISTRY I would like this list to be extended with the term REGISTRY. I will note the issue tomorow in the ENUM WG, but need consensus to take place here, so please comment either here or tomorrow in the ENUM WG session. Antoin Verschuren Technical Advisor Policy & Business Development SIDN Utrechtseweg 310 PO Box 5022 6802 EA Arnhem The Netherlands T +31 26 3525510 F +31 26 3525505 M +31 6 23368970 E antoin.verschuren@sidn.nl W http://www.sidn.nl/
Hi, I agree with you about extending the organization type, but I think the REGISTRY can cover many things including ENUM, The more specific term may be the better choice. Alireza Saleh .ir ccTLD Antoin Verschuren wrote:
Hi all,
In order for ENUM registries to be correctly distinguished in the RIPE NCC database, I want to propose a new organization type to be used in the organization object.
Current organization types are: IANA RIR NIR LIR NON-REGISTRY
I would like this list to be extended with the term REGISTRY.
I will note the issue tomorow in the ENUM WG, but need consensus to take place here, so please comment either here or tomorrow in the ENUM WG session.
Antoin Verschuren
Technical Advisor Policy & Business Development SIDN Utrechtseweg 310 PO Box 5022 6802 EA Arnhem The Netherlands
T +31 26 3525510 F +31 26 3525505 M +31 6 23368970 E antoin.verschuren@sidn.nl W http://www.sidn.nl/
On Oct 3, 2006, at 09:35, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
I would like this list to be extended with the term REGISTRY.
I will note the issue tomorow in the ENUM WG, but need consensus to take place here, so please comment either here or tomorrow in the ENUM WG session.
I strongly support the idea of having a new organisation type to describe ENUM "registries". I do not support your suggestion for this type to be called REGISTRY. First of all, it's too confusing: isn't an LIR or an RIR a "registry"? And would a DNS registry operator like SIDN (say) be a REGISTRY or an LIR when it gets address space and AS numbers from an RIR? Secondly, it is too specific to define the thing that "owns" an ENUM delegation as a REGISTRY. In the UK (and probably other countries), the entity that oversees the ENUM delegation is a company that has an arms-length relationship with the Administration/ Regulator. That company does not run a registry itself. Instead it will have a contract with a registry operator. There may well be other governance models for ENUM that will be adopted which mean the "ownership" of an ENUM delegation does not go to a registry operator. There would be something else that wasn't a registry in between. I think we need a name for this type that is more neutral and doesn't imply a specific governance model. How about EIR: ENUM Internet Registry?
This message has two purposes. It is addressed to the ENUM WG with the purpose of determining consensus in this WG on the proposal from Antoin Verschuren. It is addressed to the DB and NCC-Services WGs as an inter-WG communication to alert these WG's to expect a consensus in the ENUM WG and a request from ENUM WG for related changes to the RIPE database. On 3 Oct 2006, at 10:35, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
In order for ENUM registries to be correctly distinguished in the RIPE NCC database, I want to propose a new organization type to be used in the organization object.
Current organization types are: IANA RIR NIR LIR NON-REGISTRY
I would like this list to be extended with the term REGISTRY.
I will note the issue tomorow in the ENUM WG, but need consensus to take place here, so please comment either here or tomorrow in the ENUM WG session.
On 4 Oct 2006, at 09:47, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
I can live with ENUM-REGISTRY, REGISTRY, OTHER or no org-type at all. I cannot live with the org-type NON-REGISTRY.
During his presentation in the ENUM WG, Antoin Verschuren made the following proposal.
In order for ENUM registries to not be misinterpreted in the RIPE NCC database, I want to propose to change an organization type to be used in the organization object. Current organization types are:
IANA
RIR
NIR
LIR
NON-REGISTRY I would like this NON-REGISTRY to be changed to OTHER.
I will declare consensus in the ENUM WG unless objections to Antoin's proposal are posted on the ENUM WG mailing list before 12:00 UTC on Thursday, 18 October 2006. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly Co-Chair, RIPE ENUM Working Group
On 4 Oct 2006, at 16:07, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
During his presentation in the ENUM WG, Antoin Verschuren made the following proposal.
In order for ENUM registries to not be misinterpreted in the RIPE NCC database, I want to propose to change an organization type to be used in the organization object. Current organization types are:
IANA
RIR
NIR
LIR
NON-REGISTRY I would like this NON-REGISTRY to be changed to OTHER.
I will declare consensus in the ENUM WG unless objections to Antoin's proposal are posted on the ENUM WG mailing list before 12:00 UTC on Thursday, 18 October 2006.
That was a typo. I'm sorry for the confusion. I should of course have put "12:00 UTC on Thursday, 19 October 2006". As this time has now arrived, and no positive objections to Antoin's proposal have been posted on the ENUM WG mailing list, I therefore now declare consensus in in the ENUM WG in favour of this proposal. On behalf of the ENUM WG, I request the RIPE-NCC to implement Antoin's proposal. I ask the Database and NCC-Services WGs to note this consensus and request the Chairs of these WGs to advise the RIPE-NCC whether there is any reason not to proceed with implementation of this proposal. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly Co-Chair, RIPE ENUM Working Group
thanks for this alert, Niall! Niall O'Reilly wrote:
On 4 Oct 2006, at 16:07, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
During his presentation in the ENUM WG, Antoin Verschuren made the following proposal.
In order for ENUM registries to not be misinterpreted in the RIPE NCC database, I want to propose to change an organization type to be used in the organization object. Current organization types are:
IANA
RIR
NIR
LIR
NON-REGISTRY I would like this NON-REGISTRY to be changed to OTHER.
I will declare consensus in the ENUM WG unless objections to Antoin's proposal are posted on the ENUM WG mailing list before 12:00 UTC on Thursday, 18 October 2006.
That was a typo. I'm sorry for the confusion. I should of course have put "12:00 UTC on Thursday, 19 October 2006".
As this time has now arrived, and no positive objections to Antoin's proposal have been posted on the ENUM WG mailing list, I therefore now declare consensus in in the ENUM WG in favour of this proposal.
On behalf of the ENUM WG, I request the RIPE-NCC to implement Antoin's proposal.
I ask the Database and NCC-Services WGs to note this consensus and request the Chairs of these WGs to advise the RIPE-NCC whether there is any reason not to proceed with implementation of this proposal.
I have not heard additional input since the DB-WG meeting on Friday morning, so in accordancve with action [DB-AP53.5 WW144] (1) I herewith ask the RIPE NCC to proceed with implementation.
Best regards,
Niall O'Reilly Co-Chair, RIPE ENUM Working Group
Best regards, Wilfried. (1) Please see item Y., close to the bottom of http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/db-wg/2006/msg00217.html
On 19 Oct 2006, at 14:09, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
thanks for this alert, Niall!
[ ... ]
I have not heard additional input since the DB-WG meeting on Friday morning, so in accordancve with action [DB-AP53.5 WW144] (1) I herewith ask the RIPE NCC to proceed with implementation.
Thanks for your prompt and helpful response, Wilfried! Best regards, Niall
participants (5)
-
alireza saleh -
Antoin Verschuren -
Jim Reid -
Niall O'Reilly -
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet