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

NCC Services draft minutes from RIPE 61
by Amanda Gowland 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

Hi Kurtis and Bijal, Please find attached the draft minutes from RIPE 61. Can you please distribute to the WG for comment? Once we've received your approval, we will publish the draft minutes to the website. Many thanks, Amanda -------------------------- Minutes from RIPE 61 RIPE Meeting: 61 Working Group: RIPE NCC Services Status: Draft Revision Number: 1 * Content to the Chair of the working group. * Format to webmaster(a)ripe.net. RIPE 61 RIPE NCC Services Working Group Rome, 17 November 2010, 16:00 – 17:30 Co-Chairs: Kurtis Lindqvist, Bijal Sanghani (not present) A: Administrative Matters Kurtis Lindquist started the session at 16:00 local time. He welcomed the attendees, announced that the minutes from RIPE 60 were approved, and introduced the RIPE NCC senior management team. B. RIPE NCC Update - RIPE NCC Senior Management Team RIPE NCC’s Axel Pawlik, Daniel Karrenberg, Paul Rendek, Jochem de Ruig and Andrei Robachevsky gave updates on the RIPE NCC’s current activities. The presentations are available at: http://ripe61.ripe.net/presentations/331-Update_RIPE_NCC_R61.pdf Brian Nisbet, Anti-Abuse Working Group chair, asked the RIPE NCC to come up with a single plan to deal with all of the proposals being put forth with regards to the registry (anti-abuse and the membership, proactive checks on information, relationship towards sponsoring LIRs). He asked when the RIPE NCC might be able to produce such a plan. Daniel Karrenberg answered that the RIPE NCC are doing quite a lot already, including developing some ideas about data accuracy and maintenance in the database. He added that they haven’t done much with reputation issues yet, but that Training Services have surveyed attendees at LIR training courses and we were currently studying the results. Daniel said that the RIPE NCC would work quickly on such a plan if they got clear direction from the community. He suspected that there might be some conflict of interest in what the anti-abuse working group wanted and other members of the community and that there needed to be consensus. He added that RIPE NCC was committed to working with the community on any such plan. Brian Nisbet added that the immediacy for the request was that 2010-09 and 10 were in discussion phase in the Anti-Abuse Working Group (and Database WG) and he doesn’t want a lot of work to go into it unnecessarily. What they want to achieve is giving people what they want in the best way that the database and registry can provide. Brian said that he spoke to the proposers and they are willing to hold back discussions until the RIPE NCC comes up with an answer, but dates or an arrangement will have to be put in place some point in the near future. Daniel agreed and said the best strategy is to talk to each other about it to make sure everyone’s going in the same direction. Shane Kerr from Internet Systems Consortium (ISC) praised the work going into governance and documenting processes. He asked Jochem de Ruig if the documentation process had any implications on the Policy Development Process. Jochem said it was a good point and that’s why the RIPE NCC is going to carefully bring such documents forward to the community, and when there is a conflict, it needs to be discussed. He added that perhaps some pieces of a document would have to become a policy document, rather than a procedural document. Shane asked if these documents would be published through the RIPE NCC Services Working Group. Jochem replied that the documents would be published through the RIPE NCC Services Group and any other relevant Working Groups. C. RIPE NCC Processes and IPv4 Address Space End Game – Andrea Cima Andrea Cima from the RIPE NCC gave an update on the RIPE NCC Processes and IPv4 Address Space End-Game The presentation is available at: http://ripe61.ripe.net/presentations/332-andrea_PPt_Nov_2010-3.pdf James Blessing from Limelight Networks asked if the reason to have to agents checking each request was to speed the process up. Andrea said that was one part of it, and that it’s also for improved consistency when they’re down to the last few resources. James asked if there would be a delay in dealing with requests while people get used to having two people for every request. Andrea replied that he didn’t foresee any big delays because having two people evaluating requests might actually speed it up. Alain Bidron from France Telecom asked about seeing firmer visibility on the depletion of the RIPE NCC’s IPv4 pool. Andrea said that maximizing transparency was being discussed and he could not say if there would be a IPv4 depletion counter posted on the RIPE NCC website in the future. Niall O’Reilly from University College Dublin asked when the RIPE NCC would be in a position to say something about the introduction of non-allocation related registration services, particularly for the ERX community and for transfers rather than allocations. Andrea asked if he was asking about when the RIPE NCC runs out of IPv4. Niall said that there were two aspects of it. The first aspect is when IPv4 runs out and he expects a need to track transfers. The second aspect is the formalisation of the relationship with legacy resource holders. Andrea replied that in some cases, the ERX space holders are already members of the RIPE NCC and that they’ve moved their resources under the LIR umbrella. Andrea said that Rob could better answer the rest of the question. Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair, said that work was going on to define the registry of Internet resources currently in the RIPE NCC service region. He added that this was a registry of resources, not a list of resource holders. He emphasized that in one year, it will be difficult to explain to ‘new kids on the block’ the difference between a resource and a historical resource (ERX), which the RIPE NCC has administrative responsibility for. He added that in many cases, the RIPE NCC doesn’t have a formal relationship with ERX holders, but that was a problem we needed to solve. Rob then proposed working on a unified registration policy. In short, Rob and the RIPE NCC are working on it and as soon as something is on paper, it will go out to the community. Daniel Karrenberg pointed out that the framework for this was already presented at RIPE 60. D. Update on the 2007-1 Project – Arne Kiessling Arne Kiessling from the RIPE NCC gave an update on 2007-01. The presentation is available here: http://ripe61.ripe.net/presentations/333-RIPE_61_Arne_Kiesslingv2.pdf There were no questions. E. Resource Certification – Alex Band Alex Band from the RIPE NCC gave an update on Resource Certification. The presentation is available here: http://ripe61.ripe.net/presentations/233-Certification-update-RIPE61.key James Blessing from Limelight Networks asked Alex to also keep a simple version for 2 a.m. emergencies and Alex agreed to it. F. LIR Closure and Deregistration Procedure – Athina Fragkouli Athina Fragkouli from the RIPE NCC gave an update on the Local Internet Registry (LIR) Closure and Deregistration Procedure document. The presentation is available here: http://ripe61.ripe.net/presentations/234-Closure_of_LIR_and_deregistration_… Sander Steffann asked how it could be the contributor’s responsibility to de-register if they’ve gone bankrupt. He also asked Athina to clarify the usage of ‘responsibility.’ Athina said that the contributors manage resources, so if something happens the contributor, the procedure dictates that the NCC will take over. Rudiger Volk from Deutsche Telecom gave thanks for the difficult work that went into the document, a document that presented the big picture. He then asked about different meanings of failing for bankruptcy in different jurisdictions. He said that in Germany, legal system bankruptcy was not the right time for returning resources as they would be getting legal protection and could continue operations, so that was the point still to be ironed out. Athina agreed with Rudiger. Alain Bidron from France Telecom asked about having to comply with these rules within the RIPE NCC service region. Athina said that RIPE NCC is governed by Dutch law and must comply with Dutch court orders only. Lu Heng from Outside Heaven asked if the RIPE NCC has to validate legal orders from Dutch court only. Athina confirmed it that this was the case. Wilfried Woeber from ACOnet/Vienna University asked about the definition of a court order delivered by a local infrastructure, as he saw a potential hardship for End User assignments: If the sponsoring LIR got into trouble, the assignment would be lost. Athina said this needed further clarification but there was another document on contractual relationship changes between End User and a sponsoring LIR (the End User has to find another Sponsoring LIR). Yakovenko Volodymyr from Google asked what happens if the LIR is unresponsive to emails due to technical difficulties. Athina replied that there are several ways of contacting LIRs and this procedure is described in the document. Yakovenko then asked if the Dutch law jurisdiction is universal and applied everywhere in the world (as it is the case with UK law). Athina said that national authorities may have agreements between each other, but she could not specify the details. As time for the session was running out , Kurt suggested that further discussion on the topic should be taken to the mailing list. Z.A.O.B. There were no AOBs. Kurtis ended the session at 17:40 local time.

1 0

Returning Unannounced Legacy Space
by Mirjam Kuehne 17 Nov '10

17 Nov '10

Dear colleagues, Are you willing to make resources available for reallocation? Read more on RIPE Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/returning-unannounced-legacy-ipv4-addre… This will also be presented later today in the NCC Services WG. Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

Announcement: RIPE NCC Training Courses
by Training Mailbox 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

[Apologies for duplicate e-mails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC invites you to register for one of our upcoming training courses: - The LIR Training Course This course teaches LIRs how to request Internet number resources and interact with the RIPE NCC. A course outline is available at: http://www.ripe.net/training/lir/outline.html - The Routing Registry Training Course This course teaches LIRs how to use the RIPE Database for routing. A course outline is available at: http://www.ripe.net/training/rr/outline.html - The IPv6 Training Course This course teaches LIRs about the need for IPv6 and includes basic information on how to plan your deployment. A course outline is available at: http://www.ripe.net/training/ipv6/outline.html To see the location of upcoming courses and to register, please use the LIR Portal or complete the registration form on our website at: RIPE NCC Upcoming Courses List & Registration https://lirportal.ripe.net/lirportal/training/course-list.html If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at <training(a)ripe.net>. Kind regards, Rumy Kanis Training Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

LIR Portal Migration is done
by Mirjam Kuehne 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

Dear colleagues, In addition to the announcement sent out yesterday, you can find some more information about the new LIR Portal on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/lir-portal-migration-main-improvements Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [staff] [ncc-announce] LIR Portal Migration is done Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 17:18:47 +0100 From: Kaveh Ranjbar <kranjbar(a)ripe.net> Reply-To: kaveh.ranjbar(a)ripe.net To: ncc-announce(a)ripe.net Dear RIPE NCC members, We are proud to announce that the LIR Portal migration project is completed. This means we migrated the LIR Portal to a completely new platform that supports the RIPE NCC's modern back-end technologies. We will be able to respond much faster to changes and will be better able to maintain the LIR Portal. Please email <sw-bugs(a)ripe.net> if you have any issue or suggestion concerning the LIR Portal. More detailed technical information will be published on RIPE Labs shortly. Kind regards, Kaveh Ranjbar, Senior Software Engineer, Business Applications Department, RIPE NCC

1 0

Discrepancy between WHOIS and delegated-ripencc
by Peter Kosinar 05 Nov '10

05 Nov '10

Hello! This might not be the appropriate place for my question; if that is so, I apologize in advance. I've noticed that the data provided by the RIPE WHOIS database is sometimes inconsistent with the data shown in the delegated-ripencc-latest file, available from the ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/stats/ server. For example, consider these two entries: ------------------------------------------------------- $ whois 91.212.135.0/24 inetnum: 91.212.135.0 - 91.212.135.255 netname: YABA-NET descr: YabaMedia Ltd country: RU $ grep 91.212.135.0 delegated-ripencc-latest ripencc|CZ|ipv4|91.212.135.0|256|20090409|assigned ------------------------------------------------------- $ whois 193.105.207.0/24 inetnum: 193.105.207.0 - 193.105.207.255 netname: ALFAHOSTNET descr: Alfa-host LLP. country: KZ $ grep 193.105.207.0 delegated-ripencc-latest ripencc|CZ|ipv4|193.105.207.0|256|20100315|assigned ------------------------------------------------------- As you can see, the data differs in the "country" field -- in both cases, the range is attributed to Czech Republic, while the block is actually assigned to anothers. Since the delegated-ripencc-latest file is used by some reputable and often-used sources (like Team Cymru; http://www.team-cymru.org/Services/ip-to-asn.html) this can sometime result in misleading and completely useless reports (as you can probably guess, it was Czech Republic getting unfair load of hostile sites attributed to it). There are two questions now: 1) What is the source of this discrepancy? 2) If it was caused by some kind of an error, can the databases be put in sync? If it is intentional, which source is more "reliable"? Thanks, Peter -- [Name] Peter Kosinar [Quote] 2B | ~2B = exp(i*PI) [ICQ] 134813278

3 2

Draft Agenda - NCC Services WG - RIPE 61
by Bijal Sanghani 05 Nov '10

05 Nov '10

Dear All, Please see below the draft agenda for the NCC Services Working Group - DRAFT: Services WG Agenda - RIPE 61 A. Administrative Matters Welcome Select a Scribe Distribute participants list Finalise agenda Approve minutes from RIPE 60 B. RIPE NCC Update - RIPE NCC Senior Management Team (35 min) C. RIPE NCC Processes and IPv4 Address Space End-Game - Andrea Cima (15 min) D. Update on the 2007-1 Project - Arne Kiessling (10 min) E. Resource Certification - Alex Band (15 min) F. LIR Closure and Deregistration Procedure - Athina Fragkouli (15 min) Z. AOB You can also find the agenda here - http://ripe61.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/services-agenda/ look forward to seeing you in Rome! Kind regards, Bijal Sanghani The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should return it to the sender immediately. Please note that while we scan all e-mails for viruses we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free and accept no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

1 0

New RIPE Database Prototype - on RIPE Labs
by Mirjam Kuehne 04 Nov '10

04 Nov '10

[apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC is improving the RIPE Database functionality and usability by introducing a trial of an improved service. With this new service it is easier for any user to see which of the data objects they’re looking at are maintained by the RIPE NCC or an Internet resource holder. Please read more on RIPE Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/Paul_P_/a-new-ripe-database-prototype Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

Draft Document: "Closure of LIR and Deregistration of Internet Number Resources"
by Axel Pawlik 02 Nov '10

02 Nov '10

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC, in consultation with external legal experts, created the draft procedural document, "Closure of LIR and Deregistration of Internet Number Resources". A PDF of the document is available at: http://www.ripe.net/legal/Closure-of-LIR-and-deregistration-of-INRs_final-d… The text of this document is intended to replace sections in two RIPE Documents that deal with the closure of LIRs and the deregistration of resources: - Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of ripe-301, "Mergers, Acquisitions, Takeovers and Closures of Organisations Operating an LIR". These sections are entitled "Closing an LIR" and "When an LIR is Closed by the RIPE NCC", respectively. The original RIPE Document is available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/mergers.html - Section 4.2 of ripe-475, "Independent Internet Number Resources - Contractual Relationship Changes between sponsoring LIR and End User". This section is entitled "Violation of RIPE Policy, Law or Contract". The original RIPE Document is available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-475.html The RIPE NCC would like to receive feedback on this draft document from its members and the RIPE community. The RIPE NCC members and the RIPE community will have the opportunity to discuss the document on the mailing lists and at the RIPE NCC Services Working Group to be held on 17 November at the RIPE 61 Meeting in Rome. Best regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC

1 0

Outage Report for RIPE Database Updates
by Denis Walker 28 Oct '10

28 Oct '10

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, Between approximately 14:10 and 14:40 (UTC) on 27 October 2010, we experienced an outage of the RIPE Database update service. During this period, no updates were processed. It was not possible to access the update service via any of the web-based or synchronous interfaces. Updates sent via email are queued and will be executed later. However, we recommend that users check their acknowledgement reports. We apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused. Regards, Paul Palse Database Group RIPE NCC

1 0

Independent Resource procedure and implementation
by Daniel Suchy 28 Oct '10

28 Oct '10

Hello, I would like to open discussion related to "Action Required: Contractual Relationship for Independent Resource Assignments" emails, that almost all LIRs received from RIPE NCC in the past. I have some notes from perspective of small LIR (or from perspective of person helping running multiple small LIRs). My first note points to system in general. Although RIPE NCC has many required informations in own existing databases already, it requires additional action from LIR in general. Typical small LIR has one or more PA allocations and exactly _one_ autonomous system registered. In RIPE database, there are records matching allocated PA prefix and ASN (route objects with proper origin AS and related inetnum objects, many ASNs has paired LIRs org: in aut-num object). In addition, RIS service (with history!) can be used for verification of these informations obtained automatically from database. For incomprehensible reason, RIPE NCC doesn't use these informations at all and instead of this abuses ALL LIRs with submiting simple form with exactly one record within it. I thing RIPE RCC has enough resources (financial and human) to do that automatically. My second note points to implementation of this new tool. I discovered, that I'm not able to "new" tool used for confirmation. I'm using PKI login feature and I have one identity paired with more LIRs. Although I'm able login to the LIR portal and modify everything I need with my certificate, I'm _NOT_ able to update informations on "Independent Resources" page. The main reason is, that RIPE NCC created new and separated (!) tool instead of simple integration of new feature/functionality to existing LIR portal. So, instead of reusing existing code used for LIR portal authentication, new outside code was developed for this new tool. And this new code doesn't implement all authentication features from LIR portal. In my point of view, this is quite unprofessional approach of modern application development. Aplications should be multi-layer, allowing easy new feature implementation. I reported this issue to RIPE NCC on friday last week, but first "answer" I received yesterday from RIPE NCC was initiation of audit in one LIR. Just fortuitous event? I don't believe. I have no problems with audit itself, I have all records, but this takes some additional time (and of course, money). Just because I claimed some problems to RIPE NCC staff due to problematic internal _implementation_ of new policy. Ok, I would like to open public discussions about this problem. There are some questions to answer and discuss: * why RIPE NCC just doesn't use informations from RIPE database in case of their availability and verifiability, why abuses small LIRs instead * why aren't RIS data used for automatic obtaining of requested informations, where this can be applicable * why RIPE NCC didn't integrate "confirmation" tool to existing LIR portal and why new outside application with _limited_ functionality was developed instead of reusing of existing code and functionality * what architecture is used for LIR portal in general, can be there easily implemented new features Of course, I understand, that there are large LIRs and some historic mess, where this action may be required due to lack of records in existing databases. But, I think this is NOT a case of LIRs started in past couple of years, where all required data should be available. With regards, Daniel

13 28