- ncc-services-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Database Updates service disruptions
by Kaveh Ranjbar 30 Jun '12

30 Jun '12

Dear Colleagues, RIPE Database sync updates, web-updates and API updates are not responding at the moment. We are dealing with hardware problems on the machines used for the database update cluster. The service was affected from from 07:58 CET (05:58 UTC) and we are working to recover it as soon as possible. Queries will keep working and updates via emails are queued and will be processed as soon as the service is up. We will send an update message as soon as the service is up or when we have an estimate on how long it takes to fix the problem. Kind Regards, Kaveh Ranjbar RIPE NCC Database Group Manager

1 0

Draft Minutes RIPE NCC Services WG - RIPE 64
by Bijal Sanghani 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Greetings, The draft minutes from the NCC Services Working Group at RIPE 64 are now online - https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/services/minutes/ripe-64 Please send any questions, comments or clarifications to Kurtis, myself or the mailing list. regards, Bijal

1 0

Fwd: Re: Extended delegated statistics
by Hank Nussbacher 01 Jun '12

01 Jun '12

>Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 08:47:17 +0300 >To: Tore Anderson <tore.anderson(a)redpill-linpro.com>, Alex Le Heux ><alexlh(a)ripe.net> >From: Hank Nussbacher <hank(a)efes.iucc.ac.il> >Subject: Re: [ncc-services-wg] Extended delegated statistics >Cc: ncc-services-wg(a)ripe.net > >At 07:24 24/05/2012 +0200, Tore Anderson wrote: >>* Alex Le Heux >> >> > Starting from Wednesday 23 May 2012, the extended delegated files will >> > be published at the following URL: >> > >> > ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc >> >>Hello, >> >>There are some problems with the delegated-ripencc-20120423 and >>delegated-ripencc-extended-20120423 currently available on the FTP: > >Another problem is that the previous file was sorted by IP and now it is >sorted by allocated/assigned field and then only by IP so one needs to >know whether the IP block is allocated or assigned and jumping back and >forth between the 2 sections. Can the file be sorted once gain by IP? > >Thanks, >Hank I see that the file is still sorted by allocated/assigned and then by IP. Why was this changed and why can't it be changed back to the way it was? -Hank

2 1

Legacy resources: some idea of what will be in the policy proposal
by Niall O'Reilly 31 May '12

31 May '12

The transcript of the RIPE NCC Services WG session at RIPE 64 (https://ripe64.ripe.net/archives/steno/16/) records the following exchange: > AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Nigel Titley, Chairman of the board of the RIPE NCC. Just a very quick note. The charging scheme task force has delivered its report. The board is due to consider that report starting in June of this year. Could I urge you to at least give us some idea of what your policy might say fairly early on so that we can consider that? > > NIALL O'REILLY: Noted. The group of us working on drafting a policy proposal have identified most of the key elements which will be included, but a presentable proposal won't be ready without some more work. In order not to miss the opportunity which Nigel kindly took care to point out, here is "some idea of what [the] policy [proposal] might say". I expect that the main elements of the forthcoming policy proposal will include the following. Current inaccuracies in the RIPE database should be corrected without additional formality, and specifically without forcing a contractual relationship. Each legacy resource holder should have the choice of registering holdings either directly as a "small" member or indirectly as a customer of a sponsoring LIR. We understand that this matches current NCC thinking. Clarity is needed as to which RIR policies will apply to legacy resources. It is not sufficient to declare these resources subject to "all" policies, as the RIR may not have authority to apply certain policies in respect of legacy resources. It will be necessary to itemize which policies are applicable. Whenever an "obvious" potential sponsoring LIR can be identified, the NCC should request this LIR to make contact with the resource holder rather than do so directly. Such cases might be identified either from existing RIPE DB records or from current routing information. There is specific concern in the NREN community that NCC members' relationships with their customers be respected in this way. We gave more detailed attention to the question of charging, as we understand that this is a current priority of the RIPE NCC Board. We are aware of two current documents relating to charging: one, the report of the Charging Scheme Task Force (CSTF); the other, a limited-circulation document co-authored by a group for which Daniel Karrenberg has been acting as editor. The latter document may perhaps be most conveniently described as a memorandum for the Board, giving an example of how the recommendations of the CSTF might concretely be implemented. We welcome the specific attention given in this "Karrenberg document" to the situation of legacy resource holders, and particularly the idea of encouraging engagement of legacy resource holders by waiving the sign-up fee. We also appreciate the suggestion made at the TERENA conference in Reykjavík recently by Mirjam Kühne, representing the RIPE NCC, that fees would not be charged in respect of legacy resources. Some clarification as to the conditions attached to this offer, including an indication of how long it will continue, would be helpful. Although it is certain to be superseded, we have used RIPE-499, which documents the 2011 charging scheme, as the starting point for indicating how we feel that legacy resources should be assessed in case a resource accounting assessment model is to be used in the new charging scheme. We propose that legacy address blocks are assessed with a score of one eighth of the score assessed for a PA block of equal size. We also suggest a modification to the "Karrenberg document" so that a sponsoring LIR will not be inhibited from accommodating legacy resource holders by concern over a possible change of charging band. Attached are modified versions of Appendix 1 of RIPE-499 and of Appendix F of the "Karrenberg document" which make these suggestions explicit. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly

1 0

Extended delegated statistics
by Alex Le Heux 25 May '12

25 May '12

Dear Colleagues, Since 2003, the RIPE NCC and the other RIRs have published daily files detailing all assigned and allocated IP resources. These are also known as the "delegated files" In 2011, a RIPE Labs article was published describing an extension to these files. This article is available at: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/new-ripe-ncc-address-statistics-reports Starting from Wednesday 23 May 2012, the extended delegated files will be published at the following URL: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc The extended delegated files will list all resources managed by the RIPE NCC, including those which make up part of the free pool. The resources will be listed like this: ripencc||ipv4|5.22.224.0|73728||available We have overhauled the code that generates the regular delegated files. One area which has been improved is the accuracy of the country code attribute for all entries, especially for direct assignments such as PI and AS Numbers. For all resources the country code was lifted from the RIPE Database object describing the resource. This was done as a one-time import and stored in our internal records. This has resulted in a massive decrease in the occurrence of the catch-all country code "EU" in both the regular and extended delegated files. However, it is still possible that there are inaccuracies with regards to the country code for some entries. Please contact lir-help(a)ripe.net in such cases. Regards, Alex Le Heux Policy Implementation & Coordination RIPE NCC

3 7

AUTO: Jose Manuel Pinto is out of the office (returning 08/06/2012)
by Jose Manuel Pinto 24 May '12

24 May '12

I am out of the office until 08/06/2012. Estou ausente até dia 08 Jun. 2012. MC, José Pinto Note: This is an automated response to your message "ncc-services-wg Digest, Vol 7, Issue 5" sent on 24/5/2012 11:00:05. This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.

1 0

Scheduled Maintenance on RIPE Database Update Server - successful
by Denis Walker 10 May '12

10 May '12

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear Colleagues, The migration of the RIPE Database update service, and the content of the RIPE and TEST Databases, to a new server has been successful. If you experience any issues with the new update service please contact our Customer Services on ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net. Any update sent to the email interface during the migration should have been completed. We suggest you check the database to confirm the success of those updates in case you did not get an acknowledgement message. We appreciate your cooperation and apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused. Regards, Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Group

1 0

Scheduled Maintenance on RIPE Database Update Server - 10 May, at 14:00 UTC
by Denis Walker 08 May '12

08 May '12

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, On Thursday, 10 May at 14:00 UTC (16:00 CEST), we will migrate the update service to a new server as part of our RIPE Database infrastructure upgrade. We expect the migration to take up to four hours. Part of this migration requires us to reload both the live and test database contents onto the new server. ----------------------------------- No changes during migration window ----------------------------------- No changes can be made to the RIPE Database or TEST Database during the migration. This includes the use of Syncupdates, Webupdates, RESTful API and the use of object editors provided through the LIR Portal. ----------------------------------- Hold off on sending email updates ----------------------------------- We also kindly request that you hold off on sending updates to the email update service (<auto-dbm(a)ripe.net>, <test-dbm(a)ripe.net>) during the migration window to allow us to make a clean restart of the new server and perform significant testing before processing any live updates. If any updates are sent to the email update service, they will be queued and run following the migration. If you do submit email updates during this time we recommend that you check the results later. ---------------------------------- RIPE Database queries unaffected ---------------------------------- Querying the RIPE Database will not be affected as this service is completely separated from the update service. However it will not be possible to query the TEST Database. We appreciate your cooperation and apologise for any inconvenience this may cause. Regards, Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Group

1 0

What ever happened to those LIRs that closed?
by Mirjam Kuehne 17 Apr '12

17 Apr '12

Dear colleagues, Following up from the article published last week on RIPE Labs 'From 80 to 8,000 - The Growth of the RIPE NCC Membership', we now looked at those members that closed in the meantime. How many of them were victims of the burst of the dotcom bubble? And which countries were mostly affected? How many closures were the results of mergers? Find some answers on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/why-do-lirs-close Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [ncc-services-wg] [address-policy-wg] IPv4 Maintenance Policy
by Niall O'Reilly 15 Apr '12

15 Apr '12

On 15 Apr 2012, at 22:09, Gert Doering wrote: > Looking forward to a lively discussion on Thursday :-) Indeed! I expect to start the ball rolling on Wednesday, with a discussion of services for legacy resource holders. As I currently see things, legacy resources don't need address policy work, and so should be out of scope for APWG. Services for legacy resource holders do need attention and seem to me to fall naturally within the scope of the NCC Services WG. My slides have to be checked by my co-authors before I can place them on the meeting web site. I'll do this as soon as possible. /Niall

1 1