Re: DRAFT local registries list
Anne,
Below is the draft list of local registries which will be published as agreed at the last RIPE meeting. Please check the contact details are correct and let us know if any changes are necessary.
Thanks for this list, which seems very useful to me. I have three questions regarding this list: 1. Reading from the text accompaning the list it is not clear to me when an organisation can be added to the list. In other words what are the criteria for being on the list. E.g., is it possible that FooBar, Inc., is added to this list as a Provider, without further info? 2. You say that some organizations appear on the list twice, since they have the Provider and the Non-Provider role. Well, in the list for NL I only see SURFnet once. Or did I misunderstand this thing? 3. This is more or less a feeling-issue (and *no*, I am not a native speaker), but SURFnet is listed as "Non-Service Provider". This sounds to me as "Provider of a Non-Service". Maybe another word could be used, such as "NIC of last resort" or "Default NIC". But again, I am not a native speaker.
*NEDERLANDS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
org: NLnet status: Provider person: Martijn Roos-Lindgreen address: Kruislaan 413 address: NL-1098 SJ Amsterdam country: The Netherlands (nl) phone: +31 20 5924245 fax-no: +31 20 5924199 e-mail: martijn@nluug.nl
org: PHILIPS status: Provider person: Osman Khan address: Philips Components SERI address: Building BC136 address: NL-5600 MD Eindhoven country: The Netherlands (nl) phone: +31 40 723802 e-mail: khan@seri.philips.nl
org: Unisource Business Networks (for EMPB) status: Provider person: Harold Rolfes address: PO Box 90934 address: NL-2509 LX The Hague country: The Netherlands (nl) phone: +31 70 371 1151 fax-no: +31 70 371 1338 e-mail: surf030@kub.nl
org: SURFnet bv (NL-NIC) status: Non-Service Provider person: Erik Jan-Bos address: P.O. Box 19035 address: NL - 3501 DA Utrecht country: The Netherlands (nl) phone: +31 30 310290 fax-no: +31 30 340903 e-mail: netmaster@surfnet.nl
__ Erik-Jan.
Erik-Jan,
Erik-Jan.Bos@SURFnet.nl writes: Anne,
Below is the draft list of local registries which will be published as agreed at the last RIPE meeting. Please check the contact details are correct and let us know if any changes are necessary.
Thanks for this list, which seems very useful to me.
I have three questions regarding this list:
1. Reading from the text accompaning the list it is not clear to me when an organisation can be added to the list. In other words what are the criteria for being on the list. E.g., is it possible that FooBar, Inc., is added to this list as a Provider, without further info?
Organisations will only be added to the list if they are a local registry. This is not meant to be a comprehensive list of service providers - to the contrary - this is a list of local registries only and it is important that the list is understood as a list of "local registries" and not service providers. To be on the list therefore, you will have to have received a block of numbers from the RIPE NCC for allocation outside your own organisation and have agreed to ripe-72. The answer to your question therefore, is no.
2. You say that some organizations appear on the list twice, since they have the Provider and the Non-Provider role. Well, in the list for NL I only see SURFnet once. Or did I misunderstand this thing?
Yep - sorry this is our mistake. I have added them to the list as a provider also.
3. This is more or less a feeling-issue (and *no*, I am not a native speaker), but SURFnet is listed as "Non-Service Provider". This sounds to me as "Provider of a Non-Service". Maybe another word could be used, such as "NIC of last resort" or "Default NIC". But again, I am not a native speaker.
I agree - what about "internet registry of last resort"? or "last resort registry". Bit long though. I dont think NIC is appropriate here. Any other suggestions? Cheers, Anne
I agree - what about "internet registry of last resort"? or "last resort registry". Bit long though. I dont think NIC is appropriate here. Any other suggestions?
Neutral registry? The problem is that "internet registry of last resort" probably implies the wrong thing. Simon
poole@eunet.ch (Simon Poole) writes:
I agree - what about "internet registry of last resort"? or "last resort
registry". Bit long though. I dont think NIC is appropriate here. Any other suggestions?
Neutral registry?
The problem is that "internet registry of last resort" probably implies the wrong thing.
Simon
To me "neutral registry" means that it would be possible to have more than one of these. "Registry of last Resort" implies that here is somewhere you can go to "in the last resort' (and that correctly reflects the role of these registries) and there would only be one such organisation. Anne
poole@eunet.ch (Simon Poole) writes:
I agree - what about "internet registry of last resort"? or "last resort
registry". Bit long though. I dont think NIC is appropriate here. Any other suggestions?
Neutral registry?
The problem is that "internet registry of last resort" probably implies the wrong thing.
local internet registry of the last resort or for short last resort registry
2. You say that some organizations appear on the list twice, since they have the Provider and the Non-Provider role. Well, in the list for NL I only see SURFnet once. Or did I misunderstand this thing? > org: SURFnet bv (NL-NIC) > status: Non-Service Provider > person: Erik Jan-Bos > address: P.O. Box 19035 > address: NL - 3501 DA Utrecht > country: The Netherlands (nl) > phone: +31 30 310290 > fax-no: +31 30 340903 > e-mail: netmaster@surfnet.nl Apart from that, in your place I wouldn't like to be called Provider of a Non-Service... ;-) Piet
participants (5)
-
Anne Lord -
Daniel Karrenberg -
Erik-Jan.Bos＠SURFnet.nl -
Piet.Beertema＠EU.net -
poole＠eunet.ch