- lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Management of the working group
by Hans Petter Holen 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Dear lir-wg, as just expressed at the wg meeting, I think it is appropriate to suggest some formalities for the wg to elect its chairs. My proposal is as following: 1) Open nominations on the lir-wg mailinglist 2) Optional discussion and support statements 3) Election of chair and 1-2 co chairs at the next lir-wg meeting in Bologna. 3b) The election to be performed either open ballot or by secret ballot if demanded by one or more participants at the meeting 3c) The election to be confirmed by consensus by the wg after the election result have been duly counted by a counting team from the audience. 4) That we perform such an election annualy to ensure the community support to the wg chairs. As the meeting expressed support towards such an idea, I would like to hear the opinions of the wg on theese matters before proceeding. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen lir-wg Chair

6 10

RE: IP Management Tool - Minimum Requirements
by kevin.bates＠bt.com 03 Apr '01

03 Apr '01

A couple of additional thoughts - (apologies if they have already come up (i have not been listening properly) ability to import/export data i.e. CSV files possible check for existing netname and/or descr field in assignment ( to prevent exceeding assignment window) delete upon return of assignment - with a check of size etc ability to aggregate two adjacent blocks into one (e.g. an additional assignment is made to an existing user) kevin bates > > Our internal solution does: . . stuff deleted . . . > > > So; A summary so far: > > > 1) We need to check for properly formulated dotted > quad format IPs: > > n.n.n.n/m where n >= 0; > n <= 255; > m >= 1; > m <= 32; > > 2) We need to check for overlaps so that two subnets > cannot overlap any space. > > We need to check for: > (where a is frist IP in range, > z is last IP in range) > > > 0 : No overlap > > a1---z1 > a2---z2 > > a1---z1 > a2---z2 > > 1 : Range 1 totally inside range 2 > > a1---z1 > a2--------------z2 > > 2 : Range 2 totally inside range 1 > > a1--------------z1 > a2---z2 > > 3 : Partial overlap > > a1-----z1 > a2-----z2 > > a1-----z1 > a2-----z2 > > 4 : Perfect overlap, range 1 == range 2 > > a1-----z1 > a2-----z2 > > 5 : Edge overlap = someone screwed up, editing > by hand > > a1---z1 > a2---z2 > > a1---z1 > a2---z2 > > ie. 10.15.20.0 -- 10.15.21.0 > > 10.15.21.0 -- 10.15.21.255 > > (oops). > > 3) We need some kind of data structure to be defined, > so that the hostmaster can access the IP space in a > sensible way. > > I reckon this should include: > > o A way of seeing the IP space - what is free, > what is used. > o A way of dividing the IP space into sections > for assigning to different areas, such as > colo, dialup etc. > o A sensible method of assigning free space (ie > not always the next free block - think of > migration). > > 4) We need to think about IPv6 > > > I hope people will comment on this summary and pummel > beat it into shape. > > Nothing worthwhile ever happened by people being > polite. > > Thank you very much Michael for your comments. > > Guy > > -- > Guy Vegoda \ guy(a)vegoda.org *Please do not send html* > NIC: GUY-RIPE \ guy(a)cryptography.org.uk *attachments* > Unix, Linux Hobbyist \ +44(0)20 7961 8318 (work) > www.thenakedfrenchman.com \ +44(0)958 469 532 (cell)

1 0

RE: Another issue related to the migration
by Lu, Ping 03 Apr '01

03 Apr '01

Andrei, The existing ripe2rpsl tool will automatically translate "AS-" to "ASN-" for the aut-num object and I think "ASN-" is more meaningful than "AS_". Best Regards. Ping Lu Cable & Wireless Global Network Tools and Analysis Group, USA W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrei Robachevsky [mailto:andrei@ripe.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:10 AM > To: db-wg(a)ripe.net; routing-wg(a)ripe.net; Migration TF; lir-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Another issue related to the migration > > > Dear Colleagues, > > [Apologies for duplicate messages] > > One issue related to RIPE-181 to RPSL migration escaped our > attention and has > not been discussed. It is related to reserved prefixes that > cannot appear in > object names according to RPSL specification (RFC2622) which says: > > "Names starting with certain prefixes are reserved for > certain object types. > Names starting with "as-" are reserved for as set names. > Names starting with > "rs-" are reserved for route set names. Names starting with > "rtrs-" are > reserved for router set names. Names starting with "fltr-" > are reserved for > filter set names. Names starting with "prng-" are reserved > for peering set > names." > > Unfortunately "as-name:" attribute is an object name in RPSL > and we have 133 > aut-num objects with as-name starting with reserved 'AS-' prefix. > > Our suggestion how to deal with these objects is: > > 1. Send a message to the maintainers of these objects asking > them to change the > name to avoid conflict with RPSL specification. > 2. Give two-week notice period after which ripe-dbm will > convert non compliant > as-names using the following mapping: AS-ASNAME -> AS_ASNAME. > > This is more a "cosmetic" change as as-name is not even a > lookup key in the RIPE > Database. > > Your comments and suggestions are appreciated. > > Best regards, > > > Andrei Robachevsky > DB Group Manager > RIPE NCC >

2 1

lir-wg@ripe.net
by Guy Vegoda 02 Apr '01

02 Apr '01

Hi everyone, This is just a reminder that this is the last day to send in your additional requirements, for those of you not happy with Maldwyn's basic list was last Friday. (If anyone is really desparate to comment, we can extend it, but I get the impression that nobody is). Today, we begin the writing an initial version of the technical specs. Please email in with your speciication suggestions. Maldwyn and I both look forward to commenting. For the moment, let me suggest that the language of Choice should be Perl 5.6 or greater for the backend. I also believe that with regard to a GUI, the web would be the logical bridge between you Windows and you UNIX people. I am thinking that where possible, multi-browser JavaScript should be used to reduced server-side work. I think tha an adaptation of the IP libraries made available by Manuel should be used. Comments? ATB, Guy -- Guy Vegoda \ guy(a)vegoda.org *Please do not send html* NIC: GUY-RIPE \ guy(a)cryptography.org.uk *attachments* Unix, Linux Hobbyist \ +44(0)20 7961 8318 (work) www.thenakedfrenchman.com \ +44(0)958 469 532 (cell)

2 1

Re: Plan of the migration to the new RIPE Database
by Andrei Robachevsky 02 Apr '01

02 Apr '01

Hi Rob, Rob Evans wrote: > > Hi Andrei, > > > Please find below a list of milestones related to the migration to the new > > version of the RIPE Database. > > Silly question; are the times UTC or CET? Sorry about this, all times are CEST (Central European Summer Time, UTC+2). > > Thanks, > Rob Regards, Andrei

1 0

Plan of the migration to the new RIPE Database
by Andrei Robachevsky 02 Apr '01

02 Apr '01

Dear Colleagues, [apologies for duplicate messages] Please find below a list of milestones related to the migration to the new version of the RIPE Database. Your comments and suggestions are welcome. Should you have any further question regarding the migration, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC ------------------------------------------------------------------ Date Actions ------------------------------------------------------------------ 4.04 Final release of the v3.0 DB software 12.04 Advised mirror's switchover to rpsl.ripe.net. - Reminder is sent to NRTM clients on 9.04 - Starting from this date NRTM clients that mirror the RIPE Database are advised to use the new server at rpsl.ripe.net, port 4444 for mirroring. 17-18.04 Migration of the TEST database to v3.0 (RPSL) - TEST Database becomes a RPSL database. Updates are accepted in RPSL format at <test-dbm(a)ripe.net>. - No RIPE-181 TEST database exists anymore. - Estimated downtime 6 hours. 22.04-23.04 Migration of the RIPE Database to v3.0 (RPSL) - New server becomes the official RIPE Database server at 00:00 23.04. - Updates received after 16:00, 22.04 are queued until the new server becomes operational. After that they are automatically converted to RPSL and processed by the new server. New syntax and authorization rules apply. - Downtime in queries will be deliberately introduced to mark the migration. Whois server downtime is planned from 18:00, 22.04 till 00:00 23.04. During this time a message explaining the migration process will be sent as a whois query reply. 23.04, 00:00 New server becomes the official RIPE Database server - Short (1-2 min) downtime is possible during final tests. 23.04, 02:00 New server starts processing updates - Two mail robots are available: <auto-dbm(a)ripe.net> - updates in RIPE-181 format (restrictions apply) <auto-rpsl(a)ripe.net> - updates in RPSL format (recommended).

1 0

RIPE Database Software V3.0 compliance test.
by DB-News 30 Mar '01

30 Mar '01

Dear Colleagues, If you have software that works with RIPE Database Software, then you should make sure that it works with Version 3.0, which will be put into production next month. Compliance tests are available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/rpsl/usercl.html More information about Version 3.0 of the RIPE Database Software and how it will affect you is available at: http://www.ripe.net/rpsl/ If you have any questions, please contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Regards, A. M. R. Magee -------------- Database Group RIPE NCC

1 0

RE: Another issue related to the migration
by Hallgren, Michael 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

Hi, > > > Dear Colleagues, [...] > > Our suggestion how to deal with these objects is: > > 1. Send a message to the maintainers of these objects asking > them to change the > name to avoid conflict with RPSL specification. > 2. Give two-week notice period after which ripe-dbm will > convert non compliant > as-names using the following mapping: AS-ASNAME -> AS_ASNAME. > > This is more a "cosmetic" change as as-name is not even a > lookup key in the RIPE > Database. Yes. Agree. Been hinting customers to trash/modify such names prior to migration date - not knowing whether or not such conflict would be treated auto-magically... Regards Michael > > Your comments and suggestions are appreciated. > > Best regards, > > > Andrei Robachevsky > DB Group Manager > RIPE NCC > -- Michael Hallgren, Eng., Teleglobe, MH2198-RIPE

1 0

Another issue related to the migration
by Andrei Robachevsky 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

Dear Colleagues, [Apologies for duplicate messages] One issue related to RIPE-181 to RPSL migration escaped our attention and has not been discussed. It is related to reserved prefixes that cannot appear in object names according to RPSL specification (RFC2622) which says: "Names starting with certain prefixes are reserved for certain object types. Names starting with "as-" are reserved for as set names. Names starting with "rs-" are reserved for route set names. Names starting with "rtrs-" are reserved for router set names. Names starting with "fltr-" are reserved for filter set names. Names starting with "prng-" are reserved for peering set names." Unfortunately "as-name:" attribute is an object name in RPSL and we have 133 aut-num objects with as-name starting with reserved 'AS-' prefix. Our suggestion how to deal with these objects is: 1. Send a message to the maintainers of these objects asking them to change the name to avoid conflict with RPSL specification. 2. Give two-week notice period after which ripe-dbm will convert non compliant as-names using the following mapping: AS-ASNAME -> AS_ASNAME. This is more a "cosmetic" change as as-name is not even a lookup key in the RIPE Database. Your comments and suggestions are appreciated. Best regards, Andrei Robachevsky DB Group Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: New Proposal
by Janos Zsako 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

> From owner-lir-wg(a)ripe.net Thu Mar 29 14:42:22 2001 > From: Stephen Burley <stephenb(a)uk.uu.net> Stephen, > I would like to here your comments on the following proposal. After > being in an audit and getting a list as long as my arm of broken objects > in the DB it turned out that the majority of the objects where pre RIPE > and not subject to the same checks. I therefore propose that all > inetnums without a status (being pre-RIPE there is no status) should be > marked with a new status of PR (Pre RIPE) and therefore be ignored by an > audit tool. Also all other objects prior to ripe should be flagged so as > to be ingnored in an audit, making it much easier to see what really > needs fixing. I think the idea of marking such inetnums is very good. I am just wondering whether "no status" really means "pre RIPE". I suspect it is not the case, as Daniel's document was discussed on the mailing list in May 1995 (and is dated 30 June 0995), while RIPE NCC did perform allocations much earlier as far as I remember. So my point is that the term "pre RIPE" may be misleading. What about "status: UK"? (UK for UnKnown :)) ) Janos

4 3