From jcurran at arin.net Mon Jul 1 09:31:05 2019 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 13:31:05 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Feedback on aging of tickets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 26 Jun 2019, at 2:23 PM, Steve Hellriegel via ARIN-consult > wrote: I read the proposal and said to myself, really? ARIN wrote this and thought it isn?t crazy? I suggest that tickets are retained for 18 months. That allows tickets to live past 1 renewal cycle of the ARIN account the NL user is registered with. 3 months (90 days) is insufficient time to resolve tickets, we often have tickets open longer, and may need to refer to an older ticket to resolve the open ticket. 18 months seems like an ideal tradeoff between needing to purge data (for performance, and ARIN liability, which you didn?t mention, noticed that) and have enough retention to complete complex, multi-ticket issues. Steve - Note that this change would only apply to very specific tickets; those tickets which are associated with requests for the specific listed reports (Associations reports, WhoWas reports, Reassignment reports, User Reassignment reports) While most action on the ARIN Online happen immediately, generation of these reports takes a bit of time, hence tickets are opened up for these requests so that the user can continue and do other tasks. The proposed change would not affect the retention of the typical (non-report request) tickets. Does this clarify? /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Mon Jul 1 09:43:07 2019 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 06:43:07 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:51 AM ARIN wrote: > Since the launch of ARIN Online, we have been in the practice of > retaining all customer tickets, and this includes ticketed requests for > reports of the following types: > > * Associations reports > * WhoWas reports > * Reassignment reports > * User Reassignment reports > > After eleven years, we have well over a million such report tickets that > we believe should be deleted from our systems in order to improve system > performance, and to improve the customer experience by clearing > unnecessary clutter from report tickets in the ticket history. It is our > intention to move forward with deleting the report tickets of the above > types (and associated reports) that are over 90-days old, and to change > our ticket retention policy so that these types of tickets requesting > reporting will expire and be deleted after 90 days going forward. > Hi Folks, A million seems like nothing for a modern data system to handle. I'd rather see ARIN invest in technology improvements that eliminate the performance problem. It is, for example, usually trivial to extract large attachments from a database and store them on a filesystem with a link from the ticket. Storage on the filesystem tends to have little performance penalty for the application as a whole. Even if you don't, 90 days is way too short. I'm not a consumer of these particular reports but in general I find it convenient to be able to search every interaction I've had. I like gmail's approach of deleting only the things which are actually and explicitly trash. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeff.tchang at gmail.com Mon Jul 1 10:00:05 2019 From: jeff.tchang at gmail.com (Jeff Tchang) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 07:00:05 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:44 AM William Herrin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:51 AM ARIN wrote: > >> Since the launch of ARIN Online, we have been in the practice of >> retaining all customer tickets, and this includes ticketed requests for >> reports of the following types: >> >> * Associations reports >> * WhoWas reports >> * Reassignment reports >> * User Reassignment reports >> >> After eleven years, we have well over a million such report tickets that >> we believe should be deleted from our systems in order to improve system >> performance, and to improve the customer experience by clearing >> unnecessary clutter from report tickets in the ticket history. It is our >> intention to move forward with deleting the report tickets of the above >> types (and associated reports) that are over 90-days old, and to change >> our ticket retention policy so that these types of tickets requesting >> reporting will expire and be deleted after 90 days going forward. >> > > Hi Folks, > > A million seems like nothing for a modern data system to handle. I'd > rather see ARIN invest in technology improvements that eliminate the > performance problem. It is, for example, usually trivial to extract large > attachments from a database and store them on a filesystem with a link from > the ticket. Storage on the filesystem tends to have little performance > penalty for the application as a whole. > > Even if you don't, 90 days is way too short. > > I'm not a consumer of these particular reports but in general I find it > convenient to be able to search every interaction I've had. I like gmail's > approach of deleting only the things which are actually and explicitly > trash. > I really have to agree with Bill here. I don't think I've ever interacted with any service that deletes all my tickets after 90 days. Especially when ARIN has recently raised fees on a large majority of their registrations. -Jeff -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Mon Jul 1 10:06:44 2019 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:06:44 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <32337AB4-52F3-4BFB-B7AE-BDF258FC1910@arin.net> On 1 Jul 2019, at 10:00 AM, Jeff Tchang > wrote: I don't think I've ever interacted with any service that deletes all my tickets after 90 days. ? Jeff - To be clear, we?re only referring to report generation tickets - not tickets associated with any of normal customer communications or requests. ARIN can certainly maintain these tickets, but the value of such reports to our customers is questionable months after they?ve been run and reviewed, and regardless of technology involved, there will be be performance implications for ARIN Online in maintaining them? hence the suggestion that we do not keep these particularly reporting tickets more than 90 days. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From athompso at athompso.net Mon Jul 1 10:11:41 2019 From: athompso at athompso.net (Adam Thompson) Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 09:11:41 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> I agree with Bill and I don't. I hate Gmail, unlike him, but I agree that there is value in retaining *all* the old tickets. I can think of all least two use cases off the top of my head where I'd want to go back to an association report after >90d had passed, and I've encountered one of them within the last year. As an alternate suggestion, I don't see any problem with moving those records out of the mainline UI onto another page and into another database. Like many others here, though, I'm puzzled at how a modern database system could be this badly hobbled (in an apparently-intractable way) by mere millions of tickets. -Adam Thompson On July 1, 2019 8:43:07 a.m. CDT, William Herrin wrote: >On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:51 AM ARIN wrote: > >> Since the launch of ARIN Online, we have been in the practice of >> retaining all customer tickets, and this includes ticketed requests >for >> reports of the following types: >> >> * Associations reports >> * WhoWas reports >> * Reassignment reports >> * User Reassignment reports >> >> After eleven years, we have well over a million such report tickets >that >> we believe should be deleted from our systems in order to improve >system >> performance, and to improve the customer experience by clearing >> unnecessary clutter from report tickets in the ticket history. It is >our >> intention to move forward with deleting the report tickets of the >above >> types (and associated reports) that are over 90-days old, and to >change >> our ticket retention policy so that these types of tickets requesting >> reporting will expire and be deleted after 90 days going forward. >> > >Hi Folks, > >A million seems like nothing for a modern data system to handle. I'd >rather >see ARIN invest in technology improvements that eliminate the >performance >problem. It is, for example, usually trivial to extract large >attachments >from a database and store them on a filesystem with a link from the >ticket. >Storage on the filesystem tends to have little performance penalty for >the >application as a whole. > >Even if you don't, 90 days is way too short. > >I'm not a consumer of these particular reports but in general I find it >convenient to be able to search every interaction I've had. I like >gmail's >approach of deleting only the things which are actually and explicitly >trash. > >Regards, >Bill Herrin > > >-- >William Herrin >bill at herrin.us >https://bill.herrin.us/ -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Mon Jul 1 10:25:00 2019 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:25:00 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: <02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> References:

<02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> Message-ID: <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> On 1 Jul 2019, at 10:11 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: As an alternate suggestion, I don't see any problem with moving those records out of the mainline UI onto another page and into another database. Acknowledged. Like many others here, though, I'm puzzled at how a modern database system could be this badly hobbled (in an apparently-intractable way) by mere millions of tickets. The ARIN Online system handles these tickets now quite capably, but staff prepared the suggestion because it is clear that the system performance could be even better if we did not have infinite retention on tickets which are created solely for report generation. Users can run these reports at any time to obtain such information if they desire it. Again, the only reason these tickets exist is that the time to go through the entire registry history and generate historical reports is significant and thus not real-time ? if information had been available instantly, then we would have instead had it displayed directly on the screen and there never would have been any ?report ticket" generated in the first place. Given that ARIN Online creates such ?report tickets? on the users behalf (and the questionable value of the report output months later), it was felt best to assign an expiration on the these ticket types. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From athompso at athompso.net Mon Jul 1 10:52:02 2019 From: athompso at athompso.net (Adam Thompson) Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 09:52:02 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> References:

<02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> Message-ID: Acknowledged. I'm saying there is some value in those reports, months or years later. Not a *lot* of value, necessarily, but certainly non-zero. The casual, instant access to them is what makes them still useful IMHO. -Adam On July 1, 2019 9:25:00 a.m. CDT, John Curran wrote: >On 1 Jul 2019, at 10:11 AM, Adam Thompson >> wrote: > >As an alternate suggestion, I don't see any problem with moving those >records out of the mainline UI onto another page and into another >database. > >Acknowledged. > >Like many others here, though, I'm puzzled at how a modern database >system could be this badly hobbled (in an apparently-intractable way) >by mere millions of tickets. > >The ARIN Online system handles these tickets now quite capably, but >staff prepared the suggestion because it is clear that the system >performance could be even better if we did not have infinite retention >on tickets which are created solely for report generation. Users can >run these reports at any time to obtain such information if they desire >it. > >Again, the only reason these tickets exist is that the time to go >through the entire registry history and generate historical reports is >significant and thus not real-time ? if information had been available >instantly, then we would have instead had it displayed directly on the >screen and there never would have been any ?report ticket" generated in >the first place. Given that ARIN Online creates such ?report tickets? >on the users behalf (and the questionable value of the report output >months later), it was felt best to assign an expiration on the these >ticket types. > >Thanks, >/John > >John Curran >President and CEO >American Registry for Internet Numbers -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Anthony.DeLaCruz at CenturyLink.com Mon Jul 1 12:06:18 2019 From: Anthony.DeLaCruz at CenturyLink.com (Delacruz, Anthony B) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 16:06:18 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: References:

<02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> Message-ID: <398B250423578A4E97AFE1B8B67C686C6532AF69@PDDCWMBXEX503.ctl.intranet> Why not just run the whowas report again and get updated info if any more has occurred. The same history should be in there. That probably is the one a do a few times a week and would be good with those all getting tossed out as tickets since I could just query again. I?m fine with the removal of the 4 listed types as the data is still accessible. I don?t think we need to have a record of every time the tool is use. Ideally just give me the info asked and don?t even make a ticket. From: ARIN-consult [mailto:arin-consult-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Adam Thompson Sent: Monday, July 01, 2019 9:52 AM To: John Curran Cc: Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets Acknowledged. I'm saying there is some value in those reports, months or years later. Not a *lot* of value, necessarily, but certainly non-zero. The casual, instant access to them is what makes them still useful IMHO. -Adam On July 1, 2019 9:25:00 a.m. CDT, John Curran wrote: On 1 Jul 2019, at 10:11 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: As an alternate suggestion, I don't see any problem with moving those records out of the mainline UI onto another page and into another database. Acknowledged. Like many others here, though, I'm puzzled at how a modern database system could be this badly hobbled (in an apparently-intractable way) by mere millions of tickets. The ARIN Online system handles these tickets now quite capably, but staff prepared the suggestion because it is clear that the system performance could be even better if we did not have infinite retention on tickets which are created solely for report generation. Users can run these reports at any time to obtain such information if they desire it. Again, the only reason these tickets exist is that the time to go through the entire registry history and generate historical reports is significant and thus not real-time ? if information had been available instantly, then we would have instead had it displayed directly on the screen and there never would have been any ?report ticket" generated in the first place. Given that ARIN Online creates such ?report tickets? on the users behalf (and the questionable value of the report output months later), it was felt best to assign an expiration on the these ticket types. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farmer at umn.edu Mon Jul 1 14:22:34 2019 From: farmer at umn.edu (David Farmer) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 13:22:34 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I have two association reports that are more than 8 years old and another one that is nearly 5 years old, they are basically useless at this point. I'm fine with them being automatically deleted, anything from 3 months to a year or so seems reasonable to me. However, regardless if automatic deletion is implemented, or not, I like to see the ability for the user to delete these tickets manually, maybe even prompt the user if they would like to delete it after they have viewed it. Given the option, I think I would have deleted my three reports long ago, probably immediately after viewing them. Maybe a compromise is to allow manual deletion of these reporting tickets and then have automatic deletion occur at like 13 months, with an email warning at 12 months. thanks. On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:51 PM ARIN wrote: > Since the launch of ARIN Online, we have been in the practice of > retaining all customer tickets, and this includes ticketed requests for > reports of the following types: > > * Associations reports > * WhoWas reports > * Reassignment reports > * User Reassignment reports > > After eleven years, we have well over a million such report tickets that > we believe should be deleted from our systems in order to improve system > performance, and to improve the customer experience by clearing > unnecessary clutter from report tickets in the ticket history. It is our > intention to move forward with deleting the report tickets of the above > types (and associated reports) that are over 90-days old, and to change > our ticket retention policy so that these types of tickets requesting > reporting will expire and be deleted after 90 days going forward. > > We plan to notify all users who have tickets that will be deleted in > advance of this action in case they wish to download any of these old > reports. We will also be updating our ticket messaging to inform > customers that these reports are subject to expiration and that they > should download any report that they wish to keep for more than 90 days. > > Because this is a significant change to our business practices, we are > opening this community consultation to solicit feedback prior to > implementation. > > Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to > this mailing list at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. > > This consultation will remain open through 5:00 PM EDT on Friday, 31 > July 2019. > > Regards, > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 =============================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From athompso at athompso.net Mon Jul 1 14:25:08 2019 From: athompso at athompso.net (Adam Thompson) Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 13:25:08 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: <398B250423578A4E97AFE1B8B67C686C6532AF69@PDDCWMBXEX503.ctl.intranet> References:

<02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> <398B250423578A4E97AFE1B8B67C686C6532AF69@PDDCWMBXEX503.ctl.intranet> Message-ID: Precisely because of the delay. The old tickets are a way to see the info you want (albeit possibly stale) without the pause which completely messes up your workflow. Although you raise a valid point: the problem isn't the tickets being deleted, the problem is that they are/were necessary in the first place. With the exception of association reports which I might want for forensic purposes, I think the remainder have little historical value per se, I just want instant access to the data (and the ability to see if it had changed over time). -Adam On July 1, 2019 11:06:18 a.m. CDT, "Delacruz, Anthony B" wrote: >Why not just run the whowas report again and get updated info if any >more has occurred. The same history should be in there. That probably >is the one a do a few times a week and would be good with those all >getting tossed out as tickets since I could just query again. I?m fine >with the removal of the 4 listed types as the data is still accessible. >I don?t think we need to have a record of every time the tool is use. >Ideally just give me the info asked and don?t even make a ticket. > >From: ARIN-consult [mailto:arin-consult-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of >Adam Thompson >Sent: Monday, July 01, 2019 9:52 AM >To: John Curran >Cc: >Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report >Request Tickets > >Acknowledged. I'm saying there is some value in those reports, months >or years later. Not a *lot* of value, necessarily, but certainly >non-zero. The casual, instant access to them is what makes them still >useful IMHO. >-Adam > >On July 1, 2019 9:25:00 a.m. CDT, John Curran wrote: >On 1 Jul 2019, at 10:11 AM, Adam Thompson >> wrote: > >As an alternate suggestion, I don't see any problem with moving those >records out of the mainline UI onto another page and into another >database. > >Acknowledged. > > >Like many others here, though, I'm puzzled at how a modern database >system could be this badly hobbled (in an apparently-intractable way) >by mere millions of tickets. > >The ARIN Online system handles these tickets now quite capably, but >staff prepared the suggestion because it is clear that the system >performance could be even better if we did not have infinite retention >on tickets which are created solely for report generation. Users can >run these reports at any time to obtain such information if they desire >it. > >Again, the only reason these tickets exist is that the time to go >through the entire registry history and generate historical reports is >significant and thus not real-time ? if information had been available >instantly, then we would have instead had it displayed directly on the >screen and there never would have been any ?report ticket" generated in >the first place. Given that ARIN Online creates such ?report tickets? >on the users behalf (and the questionable value of the report output >months later), it was felt best to assign an expiration on the these >ticket types. > >Thanks, >/John > >John Curran >President and CEO >American Registry for Internet Numbers > > > >-- >Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain >confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this >communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have >received this communication in error, please immediately notify the >sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and >any attachments. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rlaager at wiktel.com Mon Jul 1 16:24:03 2019 From: rlaager at wiktel.com (Richard Laager) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 15:24:03 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> References:

<02344DA7-D82A-4C37-BBDF-18D9A217BFC5@athompso.net> <58F38CA8-D4BB-417D-AEE1-D49E167A521D@arin.net> Message-ID: <864c4e5f-a092-a447-6d2e-367f8f3da0b6@wiktel.com> On 7/1/19 9:25 AM, John Curran wrote: > Again, the only reason these tickets exist is that the time to go > through the entire registry history and generate historical reports is > significant and thus not real-time ? if information had been available > instantly, then we would have instead had it displayed directly on the > screen and there never would have been any ?report ticket" generated in > the first place. ? Given that ARIN Online creates such ?report tickets? > on the users behalf (and the questionable value of the report output > months later), it was felt best to assign an expiration on the these > ticket types. It seems perfectly reasonable to me to delete these tickets relatively quickly. -- Richard From rfg at tristatelogic.com Mon Jul 1 17:51:11 2019 From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 14:51:11 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ACSP Consultation: Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets In-Reply-To: <864c4e5f-a092-a447-6d2e-367f8f3da0b6@wiktel.com> Message-ID: <278.1562017871@segfault.tristatelogic.com> In message <864c4e5f-a092-a447-6d2e-367f8f3da0b6 at wiktel.com>, Richard Laager wrote: >It seems perfectly reasonable to me to delete these tickets relatively >quickly. I don't have any dog in this fight, but I would just like to say that it is my belief that, in general, corporate attorneys do always advise all organizations to have clear and specific document retention policies, and that ideally, such policies should endeavor to minimize the time and effort which may be needed in order to satisfy any and all legal production requests. After all, you don't want to get stuck having to dig down into the catacombs in order to resurect stuff left over from the Bronze Age. Regards, rfg From steveh at net253.net Thu Jul 4 15:17:42 2019 From: steveh at net253.net (Steve Hellriegel) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 12:17:42 -0700 Subject: Feedback on 2019.01 - Deleting Aged Report Request Tickets Message-ID: <018b01d5329d$27d56b50$778041f0$@net253.net> TLDR; I now support the proposal as written. Details: The wording of the announcement misled me to believe _all_ tickets were going to be given the 90 day treatment. It is unreasonable to assume ARIN will provide unlimited storage for user's report generation habits. Retention of a report is the responsibility of the requester. The existing ticket solution is a good way to "catch and hold the data" until the requestor comes back to pick up the report that was generated. Yes, it is a separate use case from "Ticket Logs" for service requests, but it is a good reuse of the underlaying infrastructure and shows economy by ARIN's staff. I went through the actual workflow for all four report types to support my feedback. -Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: