June 2000 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: Modifying references to contact info in the RIPE DB
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 24 Jun '01

24 Jun '01

Hi Joao! >If the reference is by name then when I query the DB I will get the list of >persons with that name, right? Right. >Whether the object belongs to the person or not is not going to save this >person from being contacted. From the point of view of the database and the >user querying it, the object belongs to that person. Right >The link is via a name. > >Now we substitute the reference by name with a reference by nic handle >pointing to the same person. >What is the difference? > >ALMOST NONE except that: True, for the case where there is a strict one-to-one mapping, e.g the recursion using the name returns *one* object. What do you suggets to do with the case where the recursion, based on the names, returns a *set* of objects? I can see 2 approaches (at least): - do not perform the handle substitution for that referring object and put it on the list of those requiring human intervention - expand the xxxx-c: list (which? the tech-c:?) to refer to *all* objects, but by ref'ing their handles While human beings are quite clever in selecting the "proper" instance of a person: object (by looking at country, address, email,...) a script might be quite clueless with that respect :-) Wilfried. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 3

Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '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 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '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 23

NEW MAILINGLIST for .de-issues !!
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello this is my very last mail (for now ;-) ) for things concerning DE-domains as I think (and it was told me) that the list was bothered to much. Further discussion could and should take place on the list public-l(a)denic.de You can subscribe to that list in simply sending an email to majordomo(a)denic.de with subscribe public-l in the body. You will then get a confirmation back which you have to send back again. I hope that this list will be a platform for the community to get in contact and discuss their issues with us. The prefered language on that list should be German. Regards Sabine 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

1 0

petition against DENIC's plans
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hi all, I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de I just copied my mails regarding this, so if there is anybody out to rewrite the text... please send them to hostmaster(a)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

3 2

Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Sorry for the German mail, i explained this before (got a german mail an just replied). Once again: We are not against moving domain-objects out of the Ripe-Db, we could even live with the persons and roles in a DENIC-Database. But the way DENIC is doing the move, wirh cripled testing data in production, is not acceptable. The plan to let only members do changes is not acceptable. Nobody would say anything against moving all the stuff to the DENIC db if the interfaces won't change too much. The way this is done now means really hard life for small providers in the future and tons of work (senseless work) now. 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 Nils Jeppe <nils(a)work.de To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > cc: NCC Network Coordination Center <ncc(a)mediascape.de>, owner-loca-ir(a)ripe.net, lir-wg(a)ripe.net, info(a)denic.de 30.06.00 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects 11:15 Hello Henning, First of all you REALLY ought to use ENGLISH on the RIPE Mailing lists. Not everybody speaks German, you know? Second of all, the plan to move .de Domains has been discussed on ripe meetings etc. You could have gone there and voiced your concerns. Third of all, .de Domain objects have nothing to do in the RIPE Database. RIPE isn't about Domains. And last but not least, so what if you have to change your robots? That's life and sooner or later you'd have to do it anyway. Your rant about person objects is totally invalid since so far, only the Domain objects have been moved and you have plenty of time to accomodate the changes necessary for Person objects. Best wishes, Nils 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n@work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/

3 3

Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

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

5 4

QOS of whois.nic.de
by mediaWays Hostmaster 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Wow! Good Quality of Service: > whois -h whois.nic.de dealtime.de Connection refused; server has reached maximum number of clients. ... Kind regards, _____________________________ Stephan Mankopf +49 5241 80 88729 stephan.mankopf(a)mediaways.net

1 0

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello Daniel, On 30.06.00 12:05 Daniel Roesen <noc(a)entire-systems.com> wrote: > > Dear Sabine, > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 10:39:51AM +0200, Sabine Dolderer/Denic wrote: > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > > have (or even must) done the migration. > > Please explain why you remove the well-working maintainer scheme. We don't remove the maintainer scheme. What we have done is to protect every Person which hasn't a maintainer with our maintainer to prevent people from deleting unreferenced objects. As these updates (~100.000) was generated, a lot of people started to recognize that there was a problem and sends updates with their maintainer. If you understand the RIPE queueing model you will know that small updates are served faster from RIPE than the bigger ones to keep chances fair. Therefore people saw that we try to put our maintainer to their one day earlier updated persons. They don't see that these requests are send one week earlier not knowing about the maintainer. As these updates were maid accidentally this was corrected later. BtW. If somebody wants to change a DENIC-P maintainer whith his own one. This can be done either by the DENIC member he cooperated with (prefered ;-) ) or by hostmaster(a)denic.de. BUT: Please keep in mind - we will go completely out of the RIPE-DB there is no need to create own maintainers for the meantime. > > > 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. > > It is allowed. Every customer agreed that his information is published > in a public database. I want not to go too deeply in this discussion but believe me that it's not that easy. I still use these argumentation too hoping noone proofs it ;-). > > > Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > Regarding phone, fax and email addresses: with this logic even > phone books would be illegal. If you go for a telefon you are explicitely ask if you want to have additionally to the telefonline a phonebook entry. If you refuse you still get the line. > > > 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. > > Please explain why this was all negotiated behind closed doors > (RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-l ARE closed doors) although it has > a wide impact on ALL domain customers and non-DENIC-members > (resellers). RIPE-Meetings are open to everybody. The minutes are published on the web. Why do you beleave they are closed? Maybe you can give me a hint where you think that these sort of discussions should take place. Best Regards Sabine > > > Best regards, > > Daniel Roesen > Entire Systems NOC > > -- > Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc(a)entire-systems.com > Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany > InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 > GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc > GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 > 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

1 0

Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

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

1 0

Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hi, you'll see the crippled data if you would look at the person-a nd role-handles. Just comapre whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE with whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. The changes at the interface: i dont think of the whois-output here, what is important is the change in update/create/delete-procedure. 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 Nils Jeppe <nils(a)work.de To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > cc: info(a)denic.de, lir-wg(a)ripe.net, NCC Network Coordination Center <ncc(a)mediascape.de>, owner-loca-ir(a)ripe.net 30.06.00 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects 11:52 On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > Once again: We are not against moving domain-objects out of the Ripe-Db, we > could even live with the persons and roles in a DENIC-Database. That is your right, however, it won't change a thing. ;-) > But the way DENIC is doing the move, wirh cripled testing data in > production, is not acceptable. The plan to let only members do changes is > not acceptable. Where do you see crippled data in denic's db? Report it to them as a bug. When I look at our own main domain (work.de) the only thing I see is a pretty ugly "changed" line, but that is hardly critcal. > Nobody would say anything against moving all the stuff to the DENIC db if > the interfaces won't change too much. The interface didn't change a lot, the output of the whois db is pretty much the same as with ripe db. > The way this is done now means really hard life for small providers in the > future and tons of work (senseless work) now. I completely fail to see the problem. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - n@work Internet Informationssysteme GmbH Tel +49 40 23880900 Spaldingstrasse 160d Fax +49 40 23880929 20097 Hamburg, Germany http://www.work.de/

2 1

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello, On 29.06.00 17:40 Sebastian Willing <s.willing(a)mops.net> wrote: > > Hello! > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 02:38:12PM +0200, Thorsten Schreiner wrote: > > > I think they want to become a BIG player... but actually can't right > > > > I cannot understand why the DENIC doesn't help funding with one central ripe > > database instead of setting up a own system. The usability and work of the > > ripe database was the best database ever, with automated robot for updates > > within minutes and a very good maintainer scheme. > The RIPE didn't want to serve the .de-namespace for free any longer and it > seems that the DeNic didn't want to pay for the services. > I agree that the better solution would have been to pay the RIPE for service. That was not an option we have as I tried to explain in another email. > > > > In the meanwhile we have Handles with the same key XYZ-RIPE, with different > > contents in RIPE-db and DeNIC-db (not only the missing remarks, but also > > phone and fax, and if someone makes changes to one of the two handles the > > other will keep the old data). No they are currently mirrored but we are not allowed to publish these data. > ....and what if a handle is deleted from one DB but not from the other? Once > the handle # is re-assigned, the owner of a domain depends on the server you > ask. The owner of the domain is the one stored in the DENIC database. Sabine > I think, the best thing is to restore the deleted records from RIPE backups and > to remove the referer to the DeNic-whois-server until either the DeNic is paying > or is running a workable service (maybe with references to the RIPE-whois-server > for persons). > Yours, > S.Willing > > 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

1 0

Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

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

2 1

Antwort: petition against DENIC's plans
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello, On 30.06.00 11:01 Sabine Dolderer wrote: > On 30.06.00 10:57 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. > > Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de > > I just copied my mails regarding this, so if there is anybody out to > > rewrite the text... please send them to hostmaster(a)bsws.de. personally I am not happy that you choose to try to change a decision which was made after a long discussion with a lot of people involved (Starting at a Technical meeting at DENIC one year ago and followed by a lot of discussions at several RIPE meetings) but as a matter of fairness I think you should try to inform the people signing the petition also about the process and the reasons. If you choose to do so you find more information about this issue under http://www.denic.de/doc/DENIC/presse/datenschutz.html or in my last mail to this issue, Thank you Sabine > > > > 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 > 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

1 0

Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hi, thats not really the point of our critics. a) changes only be made by members???? b) technical solution - RIPE's solutions are working really good, DENIC's past solutions are poor c) change in interfaces not acceptable 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. 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 f) plans making life for non-members harder -> DENIC tries to get more payin' members???? g) plans to charge for person: and role: records? h) to be continued... 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

1 0

Antwort: Re: Deletion of German domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

On 29.06.00 16:20 Marcus Rist <marcus(a)netplace.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > Engin Gunduz wrote To mediaWays Hostmaster: > > On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, mediaWays Hostmaster wrote: > > > Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has > > > only a reference to an german domain object mark as > > > "NEVER_REFD" now? > > > > Yes, they will be marked as NEVER_REFD. We didn't change > > anything in the consistency project regarding to .de > > domain deletions. Even we did change something, since > > person objects will be created in RIPE whois db for a couple > > of months more, and since we won't have the new .de domains, > > our changes would be void. > > Just to be sure and because we've discused it over here heavily: > > RIPE will not delete any person object in the RIPE database that is > marked as NEVER_REFD but protected by any kind of maintainer, right? we have discussed these concerns with the database people in RIPE and we both understand that a deletion of the person objects should only be done after a complete migration of this data to DENIC. Regards Sabine > > best regards > -Marcus > > -- > Marcus Rist > email: marcus(a)netplace.de > netplace Telematic GmbH fon: +49 89 551805-23 > http://www.netplace.de/ fax: +49 89 551805-24 > > 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

1 0

Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

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

1 0

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello Thomas, On 29.06.00 16:49 Thomas Krause <tk(a)webmatic.de> wrote: > > > Hi, > > must be a really stupid conversion procedure ... A large part here in > east germany has a leading zero at the ZIP-Code - nice that > these zeros where removed ... > > role: Hostmaster Webmatic > address: Webmatic Kommunikations GmbH > address: Weissenfelser Str. 46a > address: 6217 Merseburg > address: DE > e-mail: hostmaster(a)webmatic.de > nic-hdl: WMT1-RIPE > changed: test(a)nowhere.denic.de 20000321 > source: DENIC I am very sorry about these bug and I think we will fix it asap. I know thats not an excuse but - even after a 4 weeks test period - you are the first pointing us to this failure. Regrads Sabine > > Regards, > Thomas. > > > > Thorsten Schreiner wrote: > > > > henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > 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???? > > > > Hi, > > > > another nice thing: We just got an error message, saying that > > DENIC tried to CHANGE a RIPE-HANDLE we protected by "mnt-by"... > > > > btw: whois.nic.de doesn't respond to whois-queries at the moment :-) > > > > I think they want to become a BIG player... but actually can't right > > now. > > > > Bye, Thorsten > > > > -- > > mailto:ths@salink.net | Thorsten Schreiner > > http://www.salink.net | SaLink Netzwerkgesellschaft mbH > > tel: +49 681 93 47 51 | Im Stadtwald, Geb. 30 > > fax: +49 681 93 47 55 | 66123 Saarbruecken > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Thomas Krause Webmatic Kommunikations GmbH > Tel: +49 3461 336630 > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > 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

1 0

Deletion of German domain objects
by mediaWays Hostmaster 29 Jun '00

29 Jun '00

Hi, Would be the nic-hdl's in the RIPE-DB which has only a reference to an german domain object mark as "NEVER_REFD" now? Kind regards, _____________________________ Stephan Mankopf +49 5241 80 88729 stephan.mankopf(a)mediaways.net

4 5

Deletion of .de domain objects
by RIPE Database Administration 29 Jun '00

29 Jun '00

-------- 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

1 0

Re: Deletion of German domains
by Simon Leinen 28 Jun '00

28 Jun '00

>>>>> "mn" == mike norris <mike.norris(a)heanet.ie> writes: > What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query > about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate > whois server? Such a mechanism has been in place for a while. The domains under .ch have been using it since December 1998. $ whois -h whois.ripe.net '-r -R -T domain ch' [...] domain: ch [...] refer: SIMPLE whois.nic.ch changed: gottsponer(a)switch.ch 19981223 In the meantime there has been an improved version of the referral mechanism which provides the IP address (or hostname?) of the original requestor to the delegated Whois server, which can be useful for logging/rate limiting purposes. It's certainly documented somewhere on the RIPE Web server. -- Simon Leinen simon(a)babar.switch.ch SWITCH http://www.switch.ch/misc/leinen/ Who is General Failure & why's he reading my disk?

2 1

RE: Deletion of German domains
by mike.norris＠heanet.ie 28 Jun '00

28 Jun '00

> > > No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It > > > is based on the community consensus that domain related > > > information (excluding reverse delegations) should be moved > > > from the RIPE Database to the respective ccTLD databases. > > > > Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. Was > > this consensus achieved at RIPE 36 and we're still waiting for > > the relevant minutes? > > Frankly, I don't see what the great fuss is about, Mike. No great fuss, Håvard, just a request for a reminder of the original action point leading to this operational change. Andrei has now provided this. > > I think this has been discussed in the CENTR arena, and if I'm > not mistaken there's been developed a consensus between the RIPE > NCC and the CENTR folks for the preferred way forward. The RIPE > DB's primary purpose isn't to serve as a repository for domain > objects and related person objects -- I have for a long time had > the impression that this has been rather obvious, and that a > better solution for all parties would be preferable (less work > for the CC registries to maintain the RIPE DB data, tighter > coupling to the underlying registry database, costs for running > the system where they can be accounted for, etc. etc.) Indeed, and this has been raised in the db-wg many times in the past, even in pre-CENTR days. It would make sense if other CC registries could adopt the practice of .nl, .no, .de etc when it comes to providing a database of their registered domains and ancillary data. Regards. Mike

2 1

RE: Deletion of German domains
by mike.norris＠heanet.ie 28 Jun '00

28 Jun '00

> >>>> According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > >>> Has this agreement been published? > >> No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It is based on > >> the community consensus that domain related information (excluding > >> reverse delegations) should be moved from the RIPE Database to the > >> respective ccTLD databases. > > Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. > > i am confused here. i presume the communities involved, ripe ncc and denic, > reached a consensus and one or the other would be whining if not. why > should this be a concern of the other lirs or the wg or you or me? See Andrei's reply, which points to a decision at RIPE 35 of the db-wg. So the WG has an interest, else RIPE NCC wouldn't have sent it the announcement about today's change in the first place. All I wanted was a reference to the original decision. Regards. Mike

1 0

RE: Deletion of German domains
by mike.norris＠heanet.ie 27 Jun '00

27 Jun '00

> > > According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > > > > Has this agreement been published? > > > No, this is a working agreement about technical details. It is based on > the community consensus that domain related information (excluding > reverse delegations) should be moved from the RIPE Database to the > respective ccTLD databases. Fair enough, but community consensus must be recorded. Was this consensus achieved at RIPE 36 and we're still waiting for the relevant minutes? It would be useful to have some reference document, even a draft, but this is **no reflection whatsoever** on the excellent work of RIPE and its working groups! > > The RIPE Database will still be the source for domain related > information using referral mechanism (as long as top level domain > objects point to the actual domain databases). Though it may be more > efficient to query these databases directly. > > > > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > > > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > > > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. > > > > While speed and efficiency are to be commended, this is rather short > > notice, isn't it? From the mail on 8th June, I understood that DENIC > > would need between one and two months after moving the domain objects > > before the associated person objects could be moved. > > > > You are right, we are moving only domain objects. The person objects > will remain in the RIPE Database for several months. What ever happened to the auto-referral mechanism, whereby a query about a moved object could be referred onward to the appropriate whois server? Regards. Mike

3 2

Deletion of German domains....:-|
by Alessandro.Pelosi＠swisscom-italy.com 27 Jun '00

27 Jun '00

Hallo: Excuse the fact that I take part to the discussion from a little time, i have previously looked at the old material present at the ripe website, but I have another question to ask to you: Dou we all plan to move all the record of the european domains to the database of the local domain registry aor is this only a single case? Are there any work in progres with IT-NIC that still has its own database? Thanks Alessandro Pelosi Network Engineering Swisscom Italy

1 0

RE: Deletion of German domains
by mike.norris＠heanet.ie 27 Jun '00

27 Jun '00

> According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan Has this agreement been published? > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. While speed and efficiency are to be commended, this is rather short notice, isn't it? From the mail on 8th June, I understood that DENIC would need between one and two months after moving the domain objects before the associated person objects could be moved. Regards. Mike

2 1

Antwort: Deletion of German domains
by Jörg Bauer/Denic 27 Jun '00

27 Jun '00

On 27.06.00 11:33 RIPE Database Administration <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net> wrote: > > > Dear Colleagues, > > According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan > to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database > on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will > be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. nearly correct ;-) The server name is whois.denic.de -- ----------------------------------+------------------------------------------- Joerg Bauer | eMail : Joerg.Bauer(a)denic.de DENIC eG | Fon : +49 69 272 35 180 Wiesenhuettenplatz 26 | Fax : +49 69 27235 235 D-60329 Frankfurt | ----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

1 0

Deletion of German domains
by RIPE Database Administration 27 Jun '00

27 Jun '00

Dear Colleagues, According to the agreement between RIPE NCC and DENIC we plan to delete German (.de) domain objects from RIPE whois database on June 28th. From then on, information about German domains will be available from DENIC's whois server, whois.nic.de. Please note that you may experience some delays in processing your updates on June 28-29. We are sorry about any inconvenience this may cause. If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. We are sorry about any inconvenience this may cause. Regards, Engin Gunduz ____________________________ RIPE Database Administration.

1 0

Re: PGP 5 CERT Advisory
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 27 Jun '00

27 Jun '00

Adrian, actually an alert was already circulated by the RIPE NCC on Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:32:58 +0200. But you do have a point in that the warning was only sent to the DB-WG list. Touching on Alessandro's point, I'd be *really* interested to find out about the "hit-rate" in our community. I.e. how many of us (if anyone at all) were satisfying the criteria to end up with a potentially vulnerable key! Wilfried. PS: on the GnuPG pages, there is interesting information wrt the randomness issue ( http://www.gnupg.org/download.html --> see EGD ) _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

PGP 5 CERT Advisory
by adrian.pauling＠bt.com 26 Jun '00

26 Jun '00

Are RIPE Community aware of the CERT Advisory regarding PGP version 5 for UNIX? http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-09.html 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

1 0

Re: RIPE NCC CIDR blocks - smallest allocations
by Joao Luis Silva Damas 21 Jun '00

21 Jun '00

Ehem... Who said copy and paste was something useful... At 14:27 +0200 20/6/00, Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote: >During the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest there was a request to >publish the list of CIDR blocks allocated by the RIPE NCC and the >smallest allocation issued from each of them. > >This is it. > >62/8: /19 >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments >193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments the last 2 should read 194/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 195/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments >212/8: /19 >213/8: /19 >217/8: /20 > >If this is what people are looking for, we will add it to our >ftp/website as a permanent resource. > >regards, > >Joao Damas >Head of External Services >RIPE NCC Joao

2 1

RIPE NCC CIDR blocks - smallest allocations
by Joao Luis Silva Damas 20 Jun '00

20 Jun '00

During the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest there was a request to publish the list of CIDR blocks allocated by the RIPE NCC and the smallest allocation issued from each of them. This is it. 62/8: /19 193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 193/8: /29 # Contain small PI assignments 212/8: /19 213/8: /19 217/8: /20 If this is what people are looking for, we will add it to our ftp/website as a permanent resource. regards, Joao Damas Head of External Services RIPE NCC

1 0

RIPE NCC ADDRESS POLICY CHANGES
by Joao Luis Silva Damas 20 Jun '00

20 Jun '00

*** CHANGES IN RIPE NCC ADDRESS POLICY *** During the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest (16-19 May 2000) the LIR working group agreed that the RIPE NCC will: - lower the minimum allocation from a /19 to a /20. - this change will take effect starting August 1 Allocations of this size will initially be issued from CIDR block 217/8. Minimum allocations do not constrain requests for address space that can justify bigger blocks of addresses. ** If you use prefix based filtering in your routers, please note this change ** regards, Joao Damas Head of External Services RIPE NCC

1 0

(Message resent) Registration Services status update
by Nurani Nimpuno 16 Jun '00

16 Jun '00

* Apologies for the formatting of previous message. Dear Colleagues, As reported at the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest, the RIPE NCC has been going through a difficult period with an ever increasing workload over the last year. As a direct result of this the response time for IP Address requests has increased to longer than what is normally considered acceptable. At RIPE 36 the RIPE NCC reported several short, medium and long-term actions in order to improve the Registration Services. Increasing the resources in the Registration Services, improving efficiency, further automation of processes, increasing the level of expertise and strengthening staff's technical awareness are concrete examples of actions we reported to initiate on both a short and long-term basis. As a short term measure we temporarily increased the staffing level in the Registration Services dramatically by utilising resources drawn throughout the organisation. It was clear that this action had a positive effect on the wait queue which rapidly decreased to a couple of days. As you may have noticed the wait queue has again increased over the last couple of weeks. We are in the process applying the actions mentioned above and are also hiring new staff to cope with the considerable workload. However, it will take quite some time before the new hostmasters are trained and working efficiently. In addition to hiring new staff we are continuing to use the resources in the organisation in a more flexible and efficient manner. We have also asked our colleagues at APNIC for additional resources that they have very kindly agreed to provide. The RIPE NCC will thus have two APNIC hostmasters for a short period this summer who will contribute to the processing of IP Address requests. This will help reduce the current workload while we continue to realise our long-term improvement goals. I intend to further discuss these goals with the May 17 Task Force set up at RIPE 36 and look forward to any input they may have. Please rest assured that we are doing our utmost to reduce the current wait queue and that we are determined to improve the quality of service in the Registration Services. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

Registration Services status update
by Nurani Nimpuno 16 Jun '00

16 Jun '00

Dear Colleagues, As reported at the RIPE 36 meeting in Budapest, the RIPE NCC has been going through a difficult period with an ever increasing workload over the last year. As a direct result of this the response time for IP Address requests has increased to longer than what is normally considered acceptable. At RIPE 36 the RIPE NCC reported several short, medium and long-term actions in order to improve the Registration Services. Increasing the resources in the Registration Services, improving efficiency, further automation of processes, increasing the level of expertise and strengthening staff's technical awareness are concrete examples of actions we reported to initiate on both a short and long-term basis. As a short term measure we temporarily increased the staffing level in the Registration Services dramatically by utilising resources drawn throughout the organisation. It was clear that this action had a positive effect on the wait queue which rapidly decreased to a couple of days. As you may have noticed the wait queue has again increased over the last couple of weeks. We are in the process applying the actions mentioned above and are also hiring new staff to cope with the considerable workload. However, it will take quite some time before the new hostmasters are trained and working efficiently. In addition to hiring new staff we are continuing to use the resources in the organisation in a more flexible and efficient manner. We have also asked our colleagues at APNIC for additional resources that they have very kindly agreed to provide. The RIPE NCC will thus have two APNIC hostmasters for a short period this summer who will contribute to the processing of IP Address requests. This will help reduce the current workload while we continue to realise our long-term improvement goals. I intend to further discuss these goals with the May 17 Task Force set up at RIPE 36 and look forward to any input they may have! Please rest assured that we are doing our utmost to reduce the current wait queue and that we are determined to improve the quality of service in the Registration Services. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

RE: Privacy issues with RIPE Database
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

Dear Jules, >Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 12:40:55 +0100 >From: Jules Desforges <jules(a)vas-net.net> >To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net >Subject: Privacy issues with RIPE Database > >Hi, > >I would like to bring an issue to your attention, >which has caused VAS-NET some commercial harm. > >VAS-NET have been a local registry for over 3 years now. >VAS-NET are also an active member of RIPE, we usually >send delegates to participate in RIPE meetings, and we >make sure our staff are properly trained in RIPE procedures. > >We always endeavor to keep our entries in the RIPE database >up to date. I'm now finding that our diligence in keeping >the RIPE database up to date, is working in our detriment. > >We are finding that other companies who are in competition with >us, are using the RIPE database as a tool to extract a list >of our customer base and hence canvass our customers with marketing >information. I do not wish to make allegations or name the parties ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >involved, but we have witnessed this three times in the last 6 months. ^^^^^^^^^ This is one of our problems, i.e. most people "hit" by others' non-conformance to rules or copyright shy away from following up. My feeling is that nothing is going to change for the better, unless we, as a community, and individual parties start to have those rules *enforced*. Doing so a couple of times and indeed going public with the action is going to change the "public perception" of the problem. >The Ripe Database is the only publicly accessible source which >contains a list of our clients. I do not feel that these companies >could have gleaned this information from any other source. The >evidence is even more compelling when all of the mail shots have been >sent to the admin contacts listed in the RIPE database. > >As a company, VAS-NET endorse RIPE's open policy concerning IP >Registrations. In the past we've always had issues with other registries >for not containing information which is important for peering decisions. >(especially the American registries). > >I suppose the biggest problem, is finding a way of safeguarding our >customers from being targeted in this way. A solution to this problem, >doesn't seem likely with the way the RIPE NCC procedures are laid down >at the moment. But, I would appreciate any input from yourselves >regarding this matter. > >Best Regards, > >Jules Desforges >VAS-NET > Best regards, Wilfried. _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Competition Time
by Matthew Robinson 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

As announced at the RIPE meeting in Hungary we have decided to hold a small competition to design a new logo for the Test Traffic Project. This is for companies who are participating in the project to place on web sites, in brochures etc. We are also looking for a new name for the TT project when it becomes a pay service. The competition is split into two sections: 1. The logo 2. A new name for the TT project. There will be prizes. Winners will be decided by voting in the working group session. Entries should be submitted to me no later than the 1st of September. These will then be available on the web for viewing. Kind regards Matthew

1 0

Re: Privacy issues with RIPE Database
by Nigel Titley 06 Jun '00

06 Jun '00

> We are finding that other companies who are in competition with > us, are using the RIPE database as a tool to extract a list > of our customer base and hence canvass our customers with marketing > information. I do not wish to make allegations or name the parties > involved, but we have witnessed this three times in the last 6 months. If you've got proof of this (or even reasonable suspicion) then inform the RIPE-NCC immediately. The information in the database is copyright and only to be used for operational purposes. The RIPE-NCC will follow this up with the member concerned. Nigel -- Tel: +44 171 864 4450 Fax: +44 171 864 4488 Well I'm disenchanted too. We're all disenchanted (James Thurber) (http://www.seanet.com/~thurber/disenchanted.gif)

1 0

Privacy issues with RIPE Database
by Jules Desforges 06 Jun '00

06 Jun '00

Hi, I would like to bring an issue to your attention, which has caused VAS-NET some commercial harm. VAS-NET have been a local registry for over 3 years now. VAS-NET are also an active member of RIPE, we usually send delegates to participate in RIPE meetings, and we make sure our staff are properly trained in RIPE procedures. We always endeavor to keep our entries in the RIPE database up to date. I'm now finding that our diligence in keeping the RIPE database up to date, is working in our detriment. We are finding that other companies who are in competition with us, are using the RIPE database as a tool to extract a list of our customer base and hence canvass our customers with marketing information. I do not wish to make allegations or name the parties involved, but we have witnessed this three times in the last 6 months. The Ripe Database is the only publicly accessible source which contains a list of our clients. I do not feel that these companies could have gleaned this information from any other source. The evidence is even more compelling when all of the mail shots have been sent to the admin contacts listed in the RIPE database. As a company, VAS-NET endorse RIPE's open policy concerning IP Registrations. In the past we've always had issues with other registries for not containing information which is important for peering decisions. (especially the American registries). I suppose the biggest problem, is finding a way of safeguarding our customers from being targeted in this way. A solution to this problem, doesn't seem likely with the way the RIPE NCC procedures are laid down at the moment. But, I would appreciate any input from yourselves regarding this matter. Best Regards, Jules Desforges VAS-NET

1 0

RE: "ownership" on ancient network assignments?
by Pascal Gloor 02 Jun '00

02 Jun '00

Hi, Perhaps the best way is to split it in two /17 or 3 /18 and 1 /18 no ? (depending of the need of each ... ) Or on of the two should perhaps ask for a new assignement ... Any other suggestions ? Or perhaps get the /16 by playing a chess game ? :-P Cheers, Pascal Gloor Network Manager (AS6893) __________________________ SPAN(tm) / Petrel Communications SA A Cable & Wireless company Phone : +41 22 304 47 47 Fax : +41 22 304 47 99 Direct : +41 22 304 47 82 Mobile : +41 79 346 00 26 E-mail : <pgl(a)cw.span.ch> Web : <http://www.span.ch> > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexander Bochmann [SMTP:bochmann@freinet.de] > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:54 PM > To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: "ownership" on ancient network assignments? > > Hi, > > we are currently noticing a dispute of two companies over a > /16 address range assigned to a predecessor of both of them > in 1991 (the original company was split some time ago). > > We're not a party in this quarrel, but I'm curious about the > status of a network that was assigned such a (comparatively) > long time ago. Can someone claim to be legally entitled to own > this IP address range? What is likely to happen? > > A. Bochmann > > -- > FreiNet Gesellschaft fuer Informationsdienste mbH > Loerracher Strasse 5a D79115 Freiburg

2 1

RIPE-36
by Heidrich Attila 02 Jun '00

02 Jun '00

Hi! Does anyone have digital photos from the meeting? Can I find the material of the last (Secret WG) session anywhere? -- ( Y ) (o-o) www.deltav.hu/~heidrich (")_(")o heidrich(a)mail.deltav.hu X-NCC-RegID: hu.deltav

1 0

RE: RIPE-36
by Mally Mclane 02 Jun '00

02 Jun '00

photos: http://photos.jml.net I'll be putting mine up when I wander into town and get them developed. regards, mally mclane =>hostmaster/core systems =>for the Planet Online, Leeds, UK =>mally(a)theplanet.net <> www.theplanet.net =>t: +44(0)1132076624 <> m: +44(0)7787100695 > -----Original Message----- > From: Heidrich Attila [mailto:heidrich@mail.deltav.hu] > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 10:07 AM > To: LIR Mailing List > Subject: RIPE-36 > > > Hi! > > Does anyone have digital photos from the meeting? > Can I find the material of the last (Secret WG) session anywhere? > > -- > ( Y ) > (o-o) www.deltav.hu/~heidrich > (")_(")o heidrich(a)mail.deltav.hu > X-NCC-RegID: hu.deltav >

1 0

Public Holiday
by John LeRoy Crain 01 Jun '00

01 Jun '00

Dear colleagues, We apologise for the late announcement, no excuses just our oversight:-( The RIPE NCC is closed today, June 1st, due to a Dutch public Holiday. The office will be open again tomorrow. Sorry for any inconvenience. Yours (from Bologna:) John Crain Head Internal Services RIPE NCC

1 0