Requirement for fax numbers in LIR Portal
The LIR Portal requires a fax-no: in several places, including initial LIR setup and ipv4/ipv6 allocation forms. Can this attribute be made optional instead of mandatory? Most organisations respond with surprise verging on mild panic when you tell them that they need a fax to be a RIPE NCC member. Does this require a policy change, or is it an operational thing in the NCC? I can't see any policy which makes fax-no: mandatory, but I haven't looked very closely either. Nick
Hi Nick, I believe that a valid fax nr is required in the procedure to reset the maintainer object authorization. If my recollection of that specific procedure is correct, it is one of the ways the RIPE NCC communicates during part of that procedure. Although we don't use a fax for normal business anymore these days, we have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's. Regards, Erik Bais -----Original Message----- From: ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: donderdag 29 augustus 2013 12:23 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Requirement for fax numbers in LIR Portal The LIR Portal requires a fax-no: in several places, including initial LIR setup and ipv4/ipv6 allocation forms. Can this attribute be made optional instead of mandatory? Most organisations respond with surprise verging on mild panic when you tell them that they need a fax to be a RIPE NCC member. Does this require a policy change, or is it an operational thing in the NCC? I can't see any policy which makes fax-no: mandatory, but I haven't looked very closely either. Nick
Hi Erik, On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them. rgds, Sascha Luck
On 29/08/2013 12:30, Sascha Luck wrote:
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them.
... nor dragging other companies into this situation. Besides, the fax for mnt auth reset is from $member to the NCC, not the other way around. So it's not relevant to this discussion. Nick
Hi Sascha There are a lot of companies in countries where Internet is still not as strong as evaluated example like in the Netherlands, Belgium etc.. These are often dependent on fax. Met vriendelijke groet, Maurice SHQ B.V. Sterk in e-commerce hosting Klantenservice Nederland: 0165-201005 Klantenservice Belgie: 03-8081633 klantenservice@shq.nl / www.shq.nl Postadres: Ekelstraat 3 4726AN Heerle - NB Op al onze diensten en leveringen zijn onze algemene voorwaarden van toepassing. SHQ.nl is onderdeel van Trafego IS B.V. - KVK Breda: 58096140 Op 29 aug 2013, om 13:30 heeft Sascha Luck het volgende geschreven:
Hi Erik,
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them.
rgds, Sascha Luck
Then, if it's optional, they could avail themselves of the option. -Bill On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:47, "Maurice [SHQ]" <maurice@shq.nl> wrote:
Hi Sascha
There are a lot of companies in countries where Internet is still not as strong as evaluated example like in the Netherlands, Belgium etc.. These are often dependent on fax.
Met vriendelijke groet, Maurice
SHQ B.V. Sterk in e-commerce hosting
Klantenservice Nederland: 0165-201005 Klantenservice Belgie: 03-8081633
klantenservice@shq.nl / www.shq.nl
Postadres: Ekelstraat 3 4726AN Heerle - NB
Op al onze diensten en leveringen zijn onze algemene voorwaarden van toepassing. SHQ.nl is onderdeel van Trafego IS B.V. - KVK Breda: 58096140
Op 29 aug 2013, om 13:30 heeft Sascha Luck het volgende geschreven:
Hi Erik,
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them.
rgds, Sascha Luck
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 01:47:02PM +0200, Maurice [SHQ] wrote: Hi Maurice
There are a lot of companies in countries where Internet is still not as strong as evaluated example like in the Netherlands, Belgium etc.. These are often dependent on fax.
Which is not relevant in the discussion about making the fax-no optional. Piotr -- gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski@polsl.pl
Op 29 aug. 2013, om 13:30 heeft Sascha Luck <lists-ripe@c4inet.net> het volgende geschreven:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them.
+1 Sander
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 03:25:05PM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
Op 29 aug. 2013, om 13:30 heeft Sascha Luck <lists-ripe@c4inet.net> het volgende geschreven:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them.
+1
+1 Piotr -- gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski@polsl.pl
Le 29/08/2013 13:30, Sascha Luck a écrit :
Hi Erik,
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
while there are many companies that are still living the '80s, I see no really good reason why the NCC has to be one of them.
Shared view. Make the fax contact info optional (and adjust proc's accordingly)? mh
rgds, Sascha Luck
Hi,
Shared view. Make the fax contact info optional (and adjust proc's accordingly)?
The NCC already posted this afternoon that will adjust their processes: Op 29 aug. 2013, om 17:19 heeft Laura Cobley <laura@ripe.net> het volgende geschreven:
Dear all,
Thank you for your feedback regarding the requirement for fax numbers within various RIPE NCC processes. We will adjust our systems to make fax numbers optional fields.
The process to request a change in the authorisation of a MNTNER object was updated some time ago and the requirement for a fax number was also removed.
If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards,
Laura Cobley RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager
Cheers, Sander
It does seem high time this be modernized. -Bill On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:00, "Erik Bais" <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
Hi Nick,
I believe that a valid fax nr is required in the procedure to reset the maintainer object authorization.
If my recollection of that specific procedure is correct, it is one of the ways the RIPE NCC communicates during part of that procedure. Although we don't use a fax for normal business anymore these days, we have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
Regards, Erik Bais
-----Original Message----- From: ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: donderdag 29 augustus 2013 12:23 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Requirement for fax numbers in LIR Portal
The LIR Portal requires a fax-no: in several places, including initial LIR setup and ipv4/ipv6 allocation forms.
Can this attribute be made optional instead of mandatory? Most organisations respond with surprise verging on mild panic when you tell them that they need a fax to be a RIPE NCC member.
Does this require a policy change, or is it an operational thing in the NCC? I can't see any policy which makes fax-no: mandatory, but I haven't looked very closely either.
Nick
Dear all, Thank you for your feedback regarding the requirement for fax numbers within various RIPE NCC processes. We will adjust our systems to make fax numbers optional fields. The process to request a change in the authorisation of a MNTNER object was updated some time ago and the requirement for a fax number was also removed. If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, Laura Cobley RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager On 8/29/13 12:59 PM, Erik Bais wrote:
Hi Nick,
I believe that a valid fax nr is required in the procedure to reset the maintainer object authorization.
If my recollection of that specific procedure is correct, it is one of the ways the RIPE NCC communicates during part of that procedure. Although we don't use a fax for normal business anymore these days, we have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
Regards, Erik Bais
-----Original Message----- From: ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: donderdag 29 augustus 2013 12:23 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Requirement for fax numbers in LIR Portal
The LIR Portal requires a fax-no: in several places, including initial LIR setup and ipv4/ipv6 allocation forms.
Can this attribute be made optional instead of mandatory? Most organisations respond with surprise verging on mild panic when you tell them that they need a fax to be a RIPE NCC member.
Does this require a policy change, or is it an operational thing in the NCC? I can't see any policy which makes fax-no: mandatory, but I haven't looked very closely either.
Nick
Aside from registered postal mail, it is the only method of record communication generating a legally valid receipt of communication, so it is highly advisable to retain this requirement. Some organizations may feel discomfort at the requirement to be contactable by accountable means, but this is in my opinion a small price to pay to counterbalance the very large number of organizations which ignore all attempts to communicate via e-mail. Jeffrey Race Cambridge Electronics Laboratories On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:59:37 +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
Hi Nick,
I believe that a valid fax nr is required in the procedure to reset the maintainer object authorization.
If my recollection of that specific procedure is correct, it is one of the ways the RIPE NCC communicates during part of that procedure. Although we don't use a fax for normal business anymore these days, we have a dedicated fax number (pointing to a mailbox) specific for companies that are still in the 80's.
Regards, Erik Bais
-----Original Message----- From: ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: donderdag 29 augustus 2013 12:23 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Requirement for fax numbers in LIR Portal
The LIR Portal requires a fax-no: in several places, including initial LIR setup and ipv4/ipv6 allocation forms.
Can this attribute be made optional instead of mandatory? Most organisations respond with surprise verging on mild panic when you tell them that they need a fax to be a RIPE NCC member.
Does this require a policy change, or is it an operational thing in the NCC? I can't see any policy which makes fax-no: mandatory, but I haven't looked very closely either.
Nick
On 30 Aug 2013, at 08:40, Jeffrey Race <jrace@attglobal.net> wrote:
Aside from registered postal mail, it is the only method of record communication generating a legally valid receipt of communication, so it is highly advisable to retain this requirement.
Even if this is true -- for all jurisdictions in the NCC service region? -- I am unable to invent a scenario where the NCC would have to use fax instead of registered snail-mail for such "legally valid" communication with one of its members. Members who are still living in the 1980s or have legal systems forcing them to do that are of course welcome to add an optional fax number to their contact data. Nobody else should bother.
Le 30/08/2013 11:35, Jim Reid a écrit :
On 30 Aug 2013, at 08:40, Jeffrey Race <jrace@attglobal.net> wrote:
Aside from registered postal mail, it is the only method of record communication generating a legally valid receipt of communication, so it is highly advisable to retain this requirement. Even if this is true -- for all jurisdictions in the NCC service region? -- I am unable to invent a scenario where the NCC would have to use fax instead of registered snail-mail for such "legally valid" communication with one of its members.
Members who are still living in the 1980s or have legal systems forcing them to do that are of course welcome to add an optional fax number to their contact data. Nobody else should bother.
Voilà ! mh
participants (11)
-
Bill Woodcock -
Erik Bais -
Jeffrey Race -
Jim Reid -
Laura Cobley -
Maurice [SHQ] -
Michael Hallgren -
Nick Hilliard -
Piotr Strzyzewski -
Sander Steffann -
Sascha Luck