From markk at netsol.com Mon Apr 8 14:09:48 2002 From: markk at netsol.com (Mark Kosters) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:09:48 -0400 Subject: lame delegation work Message-ID: <20020408180948.GF2000@netsol.com> Hi WRT this morning's interesting lame delegation discussion, I'd thought I would resurrect the InterNIC's lame delegation policy attempt that Tom Newell and I wrote in '96. Unfortunately, we never achieved any consensus on this so it was not implemented. Hopefully, this could be useful input as the policy discussion moves forward. Regards, Mark -- Mark Kosters markk at netsol.com Verisign Applied Research -------------- next part -------------- [ URL ftp://rs.internic.net/policy/internic/internic-domain-5.txt ] [ 07/96 ] ======================================================================== The InterNIC Lame Delegation Policy - DRAFT Table of Contents I. Introduction II. The Lame Delegation Detection and Notification Process III. Correction Procedures Appendix A (What Is Lame Delegation?) Appendix B (How Can I See If The Server Is "lame"?) Appendix C (DNS Bibliography) ======================================================================== I. Introduction Effective October 1, 1996, the InterNIC will implement a more restrictive registration process that verifies authoritative responses from registered name servers. This document details how InterNIC will deal with name registrations whose name server does not answer authoritatively for the domain which is listed in the parent registry. Lame delegations (names registered without correct primary or secondary name-service) result in the propagation of false DNS information and place a significant burden on the DNS system. Further, listing name servers that do not answer authoritatively for a particular domain means that users cannot find out more information about names within that zone of authority and results in host lookup failure, loss of mail, and other problems. Additionally, the condition places a significant burden on the administrators of "falsely" identified name servers. The InterNIC is not interested in "policing" the Internet to determine to what use a name is put. However, the InterNIC does have a responsibility to maintain accurate DNS information and to prevent the distribution of false data to the root name servers. Appendix A describes "Lame Delegation" in more detail and includes a discussion of the effect Lame Delegation has on all Internet users. Appendix B describes how to detect "Lame Delegation." Appendix C provides a concise bibliography for a more detailed examination of DNS. II. The "Lame" Detection and Notification Process The InterNIC has considered two possible methods for determining whether name servers are operational for a requested name: before the registration takes place or after registration is completed. Each scenario presents potential problems: Pre-registration considerations: A) An applicant faces the risk of completing the name server configuration work only to find at the time of name registration that the name has already been requested. B) At the time of registration, the name server may not be reachable or otherwise available due to the name server being down or because of transient network conditions. Post-registration considerations: A) The name server may not yet be configured and thus the InterNIC propagates "false" DNS information. B) The name server may not yet be attached to the Internet. The InterNIC has experimented with both methods and has had more success with routine post-registration checking. Therefore, the InterNIC will implement the Lame Delegation policy as follows: 1) After receipt/processing of a name registration template, and at random intervals thereafter, the InterNIC will perform a DNS query via UDP Port 53 on domain names for an SOA response for the name being registered. 2) If the query of the domain name returns a non-authoritative response from all the listed name servers, the query will be repeated four times over the next 30 days at random intervals approximately 7 days apart, with notification to all listed whois and nameserver contacts of the possible pending deletion. If at least one server answers correctly, but one or more are lame, FYI notifications will be sent to all contacts and checking will be discontinued. Additionally, e-mail notices will be provided to the contact for the name servers holding the delegation to alert them to the "lame" condition. Notifications will state explicitly the consequences of not correcting the "lame" condition and will be assigned a descriptive subject as follows: Subject: Lame Delegation Notice: DOMAIN_NAME The notification will include a timestamp for when the query was performed. 3) If, following 30 days, the name servers still provide no SOA response, the name will be placed in a "hold" status and the DNS information will no longer be propagated. The administrative contact will be notified by postal mail and all whois contacts will be notified by e-mail, with instructions for taking corrective action. 4) Following 60 days in a "hold" status, the name will be deleted and made available for reregistration. Notification of the final deletion will be sent to the name server and domain name contacts listed in the NIC database. III. Correction Procedures 1) The lame condition may be caused by any number of problems, including transient outages, a misconfigured name server, or a deliberately inactive name that is being reserved for later use. Contact your Internet service provider or Technical Contact for assistance. 2) Once the lame condition has been corrected, notify the InterNIC by submitting a "modify" domain name template indicating in the "purpose" section that the condition has been corrected. Please include all information in items 7 and 8 as well. 3) After InterNIC receives notification that the lame condition has been corrected, a DNS query via UDP Port 53 will be performed to verify that the name server provides an authoritative response. If it does, the name will be removed from the lame delegation notification cycle; if it does not, the name will remain in the notification cycle. In summary, this policy proposes that domain names marked as "Lame Delegations" be put on hold for 60 days if for any 30 day period they fail to provide authoritative name-service. While to those not familiar with DNS this may seem punitive, if a domain name has no name-service, it provides no functionality and cannot be reached by any Internet service. During this period, should the name-holder correct the problem, they may simply contact the InterNIC and the name information will again be propagated to the root name servers presuming authoritative servers answer in accordance with this policy. Although new applicants may sometimes experience delays in finding a service provider, or installing their own name servers, 90 days is a reasonable period for the contracting of such service. ======================================================================== Appendix A (What is "Lame Delegation"?) In it's early days, the Internet relied upon a centrally administered table that mapped host names to IP addresses. As the number of Internet hosts grew, it quickly became apparent that this centrally-maintained table was an administrative burden and prone to errors. In response to this problem, the domain name system was developed as a scaleable solution which hierarchically distributed host naming information to the administrators within the respective local domains. This delegation was achieved by creating pointers to the name servers that performed for that delegation level. For example, the root authority "." has delegated the us domain, ".us" to isi.edu to administer and to further delegate. The InterNIC is the delegation authority for the root domain, the three-letter Top-level domains (com, edu, org, net, and gov), and the root domain for reverse-lookups (in-addr.arpa). The InterNIC will register for each delegation, the current holder of that particular domain name, its corporate name and postal address, both technical and administrative contacts for that particular delegation, and the domain servers (up to seven). In the past, the registration process has been an informal affair where anyone who desired a domain name was able to fill out a template and send it to the InterNIC to be registered. Spot checks have been done in the past to make sure the name servers answered for the requested domain but as the number of registrations grew, it became an increasingly resource intensive process, resulting in delayed registrations. As a result, authoritative name service has not been verified for all registered names. With domain name registrations growing at an exponential rate, the InterNIC has sought to automate every process possible in the domain registration cycle. In the past, an authoritative answer from both the primary and secondary name-service was not required at the time of the domain submission. As a result, in a number of instances, administrators of name servers have found that without their knowledge, name registrations have been delegated, "pointing" towards their service without authorization. Obviously, without further data provided to that service, the name servers would be incapable of answering DNS queries, however, even a negative response to queries places a burden on systems. As a result, the InterNIC proposes a more restrictive stance, automating the process whereby name-service is verified for domain name applications. We will now reject submissions at the time of receipt if registration constitutes "Lame Delegation". "Lame Delegation" is the condition whereby a name-space is delegated to an entity but that entity will not answer to that name. This can occur under the following conditions: None of the listed servers are reachable. The server is reachable but does not answer to DNS queries. The listed server is reachable but does not answer authoritatively with an SOA record for the name. Simply put, "Lame Delegation" is bad because: - it increases the burden on the root name servers which causes ALL domain names to be resolved at a slower rate. - Internet service providers who have their servers listed by users who are not customers are burdened unfairly. The result can be decreased performance of name server machines, dissatisfied/confused customers who cannot understand why an application may not be functioning (non-resolving URL's), or wasted time and resources spent tracking unauthorized use of system resources. - It serves as an unintended "reservation" mechanism for domain names. The Domain Name System FAQ offers the following more technical examination of "Lame Delegation". It is available at the URL: ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/internet/tcp-ip/domains-faq/ Q: What is "Lame Delegation"? A: Two things are required for a "Lame Delegation": 1) A name server X is delegated as authoritative for a zone. 2) name server X is not performing name-service for that zone. Try to think of a "Lame Delegation" as a long-term condition, brought about by a misconfiguration somewhere. Bryan Beecher's 1992 LISA paper on "Lame Delegations" is good to read on this. The problem really lies in misconfigured name servers, not "lameness" brought about by transient outages. The latter is common on the Internet and hard to avoid, while the former is correctable. In order to be performing name-service for a zone, it must have (presumed correct) data for that zone, and it must be answering authoritatively to resolver queries for that zone. (The AA bit is set in the flags section) The "classic" "Lame Delegation" case is when name server X is delegated as authoritative for domain Y, yet when you ask Y about X, it returns non-authoritative data. Here's an example that shows what happens most often (using dig, dnswalk, and doc to find). Let's say the domain bogus.com gets registered at the NIC and they have listed 3 name servers, both from their *upstream* provider: bogus.com IN NS ns.bogus.com bogus.com IN NS upstream.com bogus.com IN NS upstream1.com So the root servers have this info. But when the admins at bogus.com actually set up their zone files they put something like: bogus.com IN NS upstream.com bogus.com IN NS upstream1.com So your name server may have the name server info cached (which it may have gotten from the root). The root says "go ask ns.bogus.com" since they are authoritative. This is usually from names being registered at the NIC (either nic.ddn.mil or rs.internic.net), and then updated later, but the folks who make the updates later never let the folks at the NIC know about it. ======================================================================== = Appendix B (How Can I See If The Server Is "lame" ?) You can check things manually with either "nslookup", "dig", or current versions of "host." nslookup - distributed on most UNIX systems. dig - freely available (ftp://ftp.is.co.za/networking/ip/dns/dig/). This tool is preferred over nslookup. host - freely available (ftp://ftp.is.co.za/networking/ip/dns/host/). To check with nslookup for example.com with the name server being venera.isi.edu: nslookup > server venera.isi.edu > set type=any > example.com. If the answer comes back marked as "Non-authoritative answer" and venera.isi.edu is listed in the "Authoritative answers can be found from:" section, then this is a "Lame Delegation". Your name server is listed as an authoritative name server, but is not returning authoritative data. To check with "dig" for the domain example.com and the name server being venera.isi.edu: dig @venera.isi.edu example.com. any If you do not receive an SOA resource record for example.com, then this is a "Lame Delegation." There are also two tools we recommend that actively check for "Lame Delegations" - "doc" and "dnswalk." They are included in the most recent distribution of bind: ftp://ftp.vix.com/pub/bind/release/bind-4.9.3-REL.tar.gz The "lamers" script that is included as part of the above release can also actively check for "Lame Delegation." It parses the "Lame Delegation" notices from BIND's syslog and produces a summary report. ======================================================================== = Appendix C (DNS Bibliography) DNS Resources Directory (Maintained by andras at is.co.za) http://www.dns.net/dnsrd/docs/ comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Part 1 ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/internet/tcp-ip/domains- faq/part1 Part 2 ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/internet/tcp-ip/domains- faq/part2 DNS and BIND October 1992, Reprint March 1993 with minor corrections. Paul Albitz and Cricket Liu Publisher: O'Reilly & Associates ISBN: 1-56592-010-4 TCP/IP Network Administration August 1992, Reprint January 1994 with minor corrections. Craig Hunt Publisher: O'Reilly & Associates ISBN: 0-937175-82-X UNIX System Administration Handbook, Second Edition 1995 Evi Nemeth, Garth Snyder, Scott Seebass, Trent R. Hein Publisher: Prentice Hall ISBN: 0-13-151051-7 TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 1 1994 Author: W. Richard Stevens Publisher: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company ISBN: 0-201-63346-9 Related RFC's: Postel, J.B.; Reynolds, J.K. Domain Requirements. Marina del Rey, CA: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Inst.; 1984 October; RFC 920. 14 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc920.txt Harrenstien, K.; Stahl, M.K.; Feinler, E.J. DoD Internet Host Table Specification. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International, 1985 October; RFC 952. 6 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc952.txt Harrenstien, K.; Stahl, M.K.; Feinler, E.J. Hostname Server. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International, 1985 October; RFC 953. 5 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc953.txt Partridge, C. Mail Routing and the Domain System. Cambridge, MA: BBN Labs., Inc.; 1986 January; RFC 974. 7 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc 974.txt Lazear, W.D. MILNET Name Domain Transition. McLean, VA: MITRE Corp.; 1987; RFC 1031. 10 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1031.txt Stahl, M.K. Domain Administrators Guide. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 1987 November; RFC 1032. 14 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1032.txt Lottor, M. Domain Administrators Operations Guide. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International 1987 November; RFC 1033. 22 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1033.txt Mockapetris, P. Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities. Marina del Rey, CA: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Inst.; 1987 November; RFC 1034. 55p. Updated-by: RFC 1101 ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1034.txt Mockapetris, P. Domain names - Implementation and Specification. Marina del Rey, CA: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Inst.; 1987 November; RFC 1035. 55 p. Updated-by: RFC 1101 ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1035.txt Mockapetris, P. DNS Encoding of Network Names and Other Types. Marina del Rey, CA: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Inst.; 1989 April; RFC 1101. 14 p. Updates: RFC 1034; RFC 1035 ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1101.txt Cooper, A.; Postel, J. The US Domain. Marina del Rey, CA: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Inst.;1993 June; RFC 1480. 47 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1480.txt Postel, J. Domain Name System Structure and Delegation. Marina del Rey, CA: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Inst.; 1994 March; RFC 1591 7 p. ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/rfc1591.txt From louie at equinix.com Mon Apr 8 14:59:29 2002 From: louie at equinix.com (Louis Lee) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 11:59:29 -0700 Subject: Handle Generation Message-ID: <4FA6CECCC8A3D41186F700B0D0784FF40108AC3C@hq-exchange.corp.equinix.com> Hmm...no other responses so far. I hope there won't be to much non-constructive criticism on the suggested implementation after the change-over. Anyway.... Ginny Listman wrote on Thu Jan 31 2002, 11:56:48 EST: > All future networks will have a handle of > NET-##-##-##-##<-sequence> where ## represents each of the > 4 octets for v4 networks or the 8 16-bit hexadecimal pieces > for v6 networks, of the first IP address. For both v4 and v6 > networks, the will be applied only in the case of > duplicates, e.g., in the case of reassignments of the first > portion of the network. So it sounds like the "-1" sequence will not be used unless there already exists a duplicate for that particular first IP address. If that is the case, will duplicates created after implementation of the new database all have sequence numbers beginning with "-2"? Asked another way, will the original handle be appended with a "-1" when a duplicate occurs (after implementation of the new database)? > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate > handle usage from network and AS names, we would also like to > replace existing handles with this new format. How many of you > out there are attached to the existing handles? Not particularly attached. The flexibility in the name along with the addition of the public comment field should be more than adequate for organizations to use the new database to show what resource is used for what purpose. > Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a hinderance? I am actually welcoming the change of existing handles. It allows organizations to better determine how much the public information they want to provide about their resources. Other thoughts and comments? Louie ------------------------------------------------------- Louis Lee louie at equinix.com Network Engineer office: 650/316-6162 Equinix, Inc. fax: 650/316-6903 http://www.equinix.com/ From Dawn.Martin at wcom.com Tue Apr 9 17:34:08 2002 From: Dawn.Martin at wcom.com (Dawn Martin) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:34:08 -0400 Subject: New Database template questions Message-ID: <000501c1e00e$48a79230$6c382ca6@lvcablemodem.com> I would like to find out how long it is going to take to > generate an Org ID. If it is web-based I would like to see > this be nearly instant, so people don't need to wait for > email etc. I think email should be sent but if the org ID could > be displayed once the user requests one on the web they can > then immediately use a text or web based template to request > what they are really trying to do. > > > Can I have 500 (or more, ok, well maybe less if we keep cutting > people:( > as tech contacts on the Org? They will be associated with the org, and > not each resource right? Also, is there a different contact that they > can be and they only have permissions set to update reassignments and > not the reassignments itself. > > Does this mean that all of WorldCom's install Engineers have an ARIN > handle and will this be viewable in ARIN's WHOIS? I'm not sure that > I like this. Can't we choose what we want to be shown in WHOIS and > what we don't? Truthfully I like how our WHOIS output looks right > now. I really don't want my name to be associated with the block > in WHOIS, but it would probably be me as the admin on the UU blocks. > > I'm wondering what the history in the decision making was in making > an admin and an org tech and resource techs. > > Is there any possibility of making the # of templates more reasonable? > I don't believe that steering towards RIPE's ideas of complex > templates > (they think that their templates are easy too)is really a good goal. > > c. Send a message to all those that have sent hostmaster email over > the last year > > Will this include reassign at arin.net emails as well? Can the message > include where people can receive training and have questions answered? > > I think that we (ARIN staff & membership) need to recognize that the > folks that attend the ARIN meetings and are active on the mailing > lists > are not the right audience to address changes that will effect the > templates and even the WHOIS output changes that are being proposed. > > Why can we only have one Admin POC per Org? Can this be a role > account? > I still don't necessarily want the role account information shown > in the WHOIS output. > > Dawn Martin > WorldCom IP Planning Analyst > dawn.martin at wcom.com > (703)886-4746 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ginny listman [mailto:ginny at arin.net] > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 12:33 PM > To: dawn.martin at wcom.com; marla_azinger at eli.net; > stacy_taylor at icgcomm.com; Cathy Clements; Leslie Nobile > Subject: Meeting Notes > > > I put together a quick list of what we discussed this AM. > > Attendees: > Marla Azinger, Electric Lightwave > Cathy Clements, ARIN > Ginny Listman, ARIN > Dawn Martin, WorldCom/UUNet > Leslie Nobile, ARIN > Stacy Taylor, ICG NetAhead, Inc. > > > 1. There needs to be more notification. Possible methods include: > a. Add comments to auto-replies > b. Post a message on the website > c. Send a message to all those that have sent hostmaster email over > the last year > d. Include message in Whois > > 2. Open source the parser code. > > 3. Provide web-based training prior to the conversion. The sooner, > the > better. > > 4. Provide "on-the-road" training. Again, the sooner the better. > > 5. ARIN strongly encourages different POCs for downstreams. Should we > make it a policy that it be mandatory? > > > From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 10 14:23:06 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:23:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New Database template questions In-Reply-To: <000501c1e00e$48a79230$6c382ca6@lvcablemodem.com> Message-ID: Dawn I don't want you to think that we won't be addressing your questions. I would like to take the rest of the week to review the minutes of the DBWG and discuss the issues with my staff. Expect to see a response sometime at the beginning of the week. Ginny On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Dawn Martin wrote: > I would like to find out how long it is going to take to > > generate an Org ID. If it is web-based I would like to see > > this be nearly instant, so people don't need to wait for > > email etc. I think email should be sent but if the org ID could > > be displayed once the user requests one on the web they can > > then immediately use a text or web based template to request > > what they are really trying to do. > > > > > > Can I have 500 (or more, ok, well maybe less if we keep cutting > > people:( > > as tech contacts on the Org? They will be associated with the org, > and > > not each resource right? Also, is there a different contact that > they > > can be and they only have permissions set to update reassignments > and > > not the reassignments itself. > > > > Does this mean that all of WorldCom's install Engineers have an ARIN > > handle and will this be viewable in ARIN's WHOIS? I'm not sure that > > I like this. Can't we choose what we want to be shown in WHOIS and > > what we don't? Truthfully I like how our WHOIS output looks right > > now. I really don't want my name to be associated with the block > > in WHOIS, but it would probably be me as the admin on the UU blocks. > > > > I'm wondering what the history in the decision making was in making > > an admin and an org tech and resource techs. > > > > Is there any possibility of making the # of templates more > reasonable? > > I don't believe that steering towards RIPE's ideas of complex > > templates > > (they think that their templates are easy too)is really a good goal. > > > > c. Send a message to all those that have sent hostmaster email > over > > the last year > > > > Will this include reassign at arin.net emails as well? Can the message > > include where people can receive training and have questions > answered? > > > > I think that we (ARIN staff & membership) need to recognize that the > > folks that attend the ARIN meetings and are active on the mailing > > lists > > are not the right audience to address changes that will effect the > > templates and even the WHOIS output changes that are being proposed. > > > > Why can we only have one Admin POC per Org? Can this be a role > > account? > > I still don't necessarily want the role account information shown > > in the WHOIS output. > > > > Dawn Martin > > WorldCom IP Planning Analyst > > dawn.martin at wcom.com > > (703)886-4746 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ginny listman [mailto:ginny at arin.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 12:33 PM > > To: dawn.martin at wcom.com; marla_azinger at eli.net; > > stacy_taylor at icgcomm.com; Cathy Clements; Leslie Nobile > > Subject: Meeting Notes > > > > > > I put together a quick list of what we discussed this AM. > > > > Attendees: > > Marla Azinger, Electric Lightwave > > Cathy Clements, ARIN > > Ginny Listman, ARIN > > Dawn Martin, WorldCom/UUNet > > Leslie Nobile, ARIN > > Stacy Taylor, ICG NetAhead, Inc. > > > > > > 1. There needs to be more notification. Possible methods include: > > a. Add comments to auto-replies > > b. Post a message on the website > > c. Send a message to all those that have sent hostmaster email > over > > the last year > > d. Include message in Whois > > > > 2. Open source the parser code. > > > > 3. Provide web-based training prior to the conversion. The sooner, > > the > > better. > > > > 4. Provide "on-the-road" training. Again, the sooner the better. > > > > 5. ARIN strongly encourages different POCs for downstreams. Should > we > > make it a policy that it be mandatory? > > > > > > > > From ginny at arin.net Tue Apr 16 11:23:19 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 11:23:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New Database template questions In-Reply-To: <000501c1e00e$48a79230$6c382ca6@lvcablemodem.com> Message-ID: Comments are embedded. On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Dawn Martin wrote: I would like to find out how long it is going to take to > generate an Org ID. If it is web-based I would like to see > this be nearly instant, so people don't need to wait for > email etc. I think email should be sent but if the org ID could > be displayed once the user requests one on the web they can > then immediately use a text or web based template to request > what they are really trying to do. Since our production database is behind the firewall and all templates will need to be processed by our Ticketing System first, we will be unable to provide an instant response. However, the org templates will be auto-processed, reducing the turn around time. > > Can I have 500 (or more, ok, well maybe less if we keep cutting > people:( as tech contacts on the Org? They will be associated with the > org, and not each resource right? Also, is there a different contact > that they can be and they only have permissions set to update > reassignments and not the reassignments itself. > > Does this mean that all of WorldCom's install Engineers have an ARIN > handle and will this be viewable in ARIN's WHOIS? I'm not sure that > I like this. Can't we choose what we want to be shown in WHOIS and > what we don't? Truthfully I like how our WHOIS output looks right > now. I really don't want my name to be associated with the block > in WHOIS, but it would probably be me as the admin on the UU blocks. The number of POC associated with an org and/or resouce is unlimited. Sounds like you are asking for a SWIP POC. As to not be lost in a lengthy email, I will pose a solution in a separate email regarding different POCs and what to display in WHOIS. > > I'm wondering what the history in the decision making was in making > an admin and an org tech and resource techs. > Different task to be handled by different POCs. This has been requested by the community. > Is there any possibility of making the # of templates more reasonable? > I don't believe that steering towards RIPE's ideas of complex > templates (they think that their templates are easy too)is really a > good goal. > To have a single SWIP template, it would have to be complex. The idea behind the multiple templates is to simplify. The reassign-simple asks for only the information that is required. However, if you wish to reduce the number of templates, there is nothing preventing you from using the reassign-detailed for all your reassignment. It would just mean that you need a POC for all of them. The reassign-detailed and reallocate are the same exact template (with the exception of the header). > c. Send a message to all those that have sent hostmaster email over > the last year > > Will this include reassign at arin.net emails as well? Can the message > include where people can receive training and have questions answered? We will be creating a website that will provide the latest information regarding the conversion. Since this information is dynamic, the message sent out will be short and direct them to the website. > > I think that we (ARIN staff & membership) need to recognize that the > folks that attend the ARIN meetings and are active on the mailing > lists are not the right audience to address changes that will effect the > templates and even the WHOIS output changes that are being proposed. > > Why can we only have one Admin POC per Org? Can this be a role account? The purpose of a single Admin is to name a single top authority for the Org. We strongly recommend that this be a person. My recommendation would be to have an individual with his/her personal email address, and a secondary email address that is a role account. This would satisfy ARIN's request of having an individual, and allow you the flexiblity of multiple people filling in the Admin role. > I still don't necessarily want the role account information shown > in the WHOIS output. > I'm not sure I understand your request. There needs to be some POC information, whether it be Abuse, Tech or Admin, in WHOIS for it to be used as a troubleshooting tool. > Dawn Martin > WorldCom IP Planning Analyst > dawn.martin at wcom.com > (703)886-4746 > Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN From Dawn.Martin at wcom.com Tue Apr 16 15:28:43 2002 From: Dawn.Martin at wcom.com (Dawn Martin) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 15:28:43 -0400 Subject: New Database template questions - Org name creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004b01c1e57c$ec7f36b0$7f7f7f7f@lteng122> Just wondering why a ticket can not be automatically assigned and the org ID request processed quicker. If a company is wanting to send in a request for an ASN (short template, short turn around time if completed correctly) the process is just getting longer. Other companies are able to process requests very quickly, isn't there other ways that ARIN can assign an org-id that doesn't extend the processing time? Infusing a process within another process only tends to irritate people. -Dawn Martin On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Dawn Martin wrote: >> I would like to find out how long it is going to take to >> generate an Org ID. If it is web-based I would like to see >> this be nearly instant, so people don't need to wait for >> email etc. I think email should be sent but if the org ID could >> be displayed once the user requests one on the web they can >> then immediately use a text or web based template to request >> what they are really trying to do. Ginny Listman: > Since our production database is behind the firewall and all templates > will need to be processed by our Ticketing System first, we will be unable > to provide an instant response. However, the org templates will be > auto-processed, reducing the turn around time. > From Dawn.Martin at wcom.com Tue Apr 16 15:45:58 2002 From: Dawn.Martin at wcom.com (Dawn Martin) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 15:45:58 -0400 Subject: WHOIS output after DB migration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004d01c1e57f$54e89320$7f7f7f7f@lteng122> I think that we should be allowed to have the POC information that our company wants associated with the WHOIS output for our organization. There was a great deal of talk about this at the meeting, and I agree that we have to have some contact information, but instead of the required contacts being the Admin and Tech I would like it to be the NOC and Abuse. People brought up different points of view, and it seems that we could be more flexible and as long as at least one POC was listed in the WHOIS output we can be happy. I would not have a problem with my name being associated with a more specific type of WHOIS search: Something like whois -h whois.arin.net admin-uu but it would not just come up with every registration associated with UUNet. This would allow people with a clew to know how to reach someone who is responsible for the block but maybe keep out some of the folks that are just looking to complain about SPAM being sent from a customer of a customer, of a customer..... -Dawn Martin > > I think that we (ARIN staff & membership) need to recognize that the > folks that attend the ARIN meetings and are active on the mailing > lists are not the right audience to address changes that will effect the > templates and even the WHOIS output changes that are being proposed. > > Why can we only have one Admin POC per Org? Can this be a role account? The purpose of a single Admin is to name a single top authority for the Org. We strongly recommend that this be a person. My recommendation would be to have an individual with his/her personal email address, and a secondary email address that is a role account. This would satisfy ARIN's request of having an individual, and allow you the flexiblity of multiple people filling in the Admin role. > I still don't necessarily want the role account information shown > in the WHOIS output. > I'm not sure I understand your request. There needs to be some POC information, whether it be Abuse, Tech or Admin, in WHOIS for it to be used as a troubleshooting tool. > Dawn Martin > WorldCom IP Planning Analyst > dawn.martin at wcom.com > (703)886-4746 > Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN From ginny at arin.net Tue Apr 16 16:08:53 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 16:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New Database template questions - Org name creation Message-ID: On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Dawn Martin wrote: > Just wondering why a ticket can not be automatically assigned and > the org ID request processed quicker. If a company is wanting to > send in a request for an ASN (short template, short turn around > time if completed correctly) the process is just getting longer. Our Ticketing System will be revamped in a later phase. Adding a ticket to a web-based request can be discussed at that time. Yes, we are increasing the processing time to request an ASN. This is based on the fact that many of the ASN requests are rejected due to lack of information. If we require that the customer pre-register the Organization, it will increase the likelihood of successfully obtaining an AS number. > > Other companies are able to process requests very quickly, isn't > there other ways that ARIN can assign an org-id that doesn't extend > the processing time? > > Infusing a process within another process only tends to irritate > people. > This whole process is designed so that the customer establishs a relationship with ARIN before requesting resources. For existing customers, this relationship is already established. This will only affect future customers. We believe through proper training, the community will see the benefits of the Org ID. > -Dawn Martin > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Dawn Martin wrote: > > >> I would like to find out how long it is going to take to > >> generate an Org ID. If it is web-based I would like to see > >> this be nearly instant, so people don't need to wait for > >> email etc. I think email should be sent but if the org ID could > >> be displayed once the user requests one on the web they can > >> then immediately use a text or web based template to request > >> what they are really trying to do. > > Ginny Listman: > > > Since our production database is behind the firewall and all > templates > > will need to be processed by our Ticketing System first, we will be > unable > > to provide an instant response. However, the org templates will be > > auto-processed, reducing the turn around time. > > > From ginny at arin.net Tue Apr 16 16:15:30 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 16:15:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WHOIS output after DB migration In-Reply-To: <004d01c1e57f$54e89320$7f7f7f7f@lteng122> Message-ID: It was agreed upon at the Member Meeting that the Administrative POC not be displayed in WHOIS. However, there was some debate about whether or not the Technical POC be displayed. Once the minutes from the meeting have been posted, I will be drafting a post to get a broader consensus on these and other issues. FYI, the original proposal display the Admin contact with the Org only, never for any resources. Also, my impression from the meeting was that only Registration Services have access to the Admin contact, for fear that spammers do have a clue. This is a functionality that Engineering can put in place. Ginny On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Dawn Martin wrote: > > I think that we should be allowed to have the POC information that our > company wants associated with the WHOIS output for our organization. > There was a great deal of talk about this at the meeting, and I agree > that we have to have some contact information, but instead of the > required contacts being the Admin and Tech I would like it to be the > NOC and Abuse. > > People brought up different points of view, and it seems that we could > be more flexible and as long as at least one POC was listed in the > WHOIS > output we can be happy. I would not have a problem with my name being > associated with a more specific type of WHOIS search: > > Something like > > whois -h whois.arin.net admin-uu > > but it would not just come up with every registration associated with > UUNet. This would allow people with a clew to know how to reach > someone > who is responsible for the block but maybe keep out some of the folks > that are just looking to complain about SPAM being sent from a > customer > of a customer, of a customer..... > > -Dawn Martin > > > > > > I think that we (ARIN staff & membership) need to recognize that the > > folks that attend the ARIN meetings and are active on the mailing > > lists are not the right audience to address changes that will effect > the > > templates and even the WHOIS output changes that are being proposed. > > > > Why can we only have one Admin POC per Org? Can this be a role > account? > > The purpose of a single Admin is to name a single top authority for > the > Org. We strongly recommend that this be a person. My recommendation > would > be to have an individual with his/her personal email address, and a > secondary email address that is a role account. This would satisfy > ARIN's > request of having an individual, and allow you the flexiblity of > multiple > people filling in the Admin role. > > > I still don't necessarily want the role account information shown > > in the WHOIS output. > > > > I'm not sure I understand your request. There needs to be some POC > information, whether it be Abuse, Tech or Admin, in WHOIS for it to be > used as a troubleshooting tool. > > > Dawn Martin > > WorldCom IP Planning Analyst > > dawn.martin at wcom.com > > (703)886-4746 > > > > Ginny Listman > Director of Engineering > ARIN > From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 17 13:30:36 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 13:30:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: ARIN IX Meeting Minutes Posted (fwd) Message-ID: The big topic of the Database Working Group was the June conversion. For those of you who were unable to attend the meeting, I encourage you to visit the listed links and read the minutes. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 10:07:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Member Services To: arin-announce at arin.net, ppml at arin.net Subject: ARIN IX Meeting Minutes Posted ARIN recently concluded its ninth Public Policy and Member Meetings held in Las Vegas, April 7-10. Minutes of these meetings, as well most of the presentations given, are now available on the ARIN website at: Public Policy Day One and Two http://www.arin.net/library/minutes/ARIN_IX/PPM.html Members Meeting http://www.arin.net/library/minutes/ARIN_IX/Members.html ARIN Member Services From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 17 13:42:42 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 13:42:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: An RWHOIS Identifier Message-ID: During the recent Public Policy/Member Meeting, it was suggested that the RWhois server no longer be identified in the 'Public Comments' section, but have a specific identifier. ARIN Engineering fully supports the idea behind this, but will be unable to implement this for the June release and will include it later as part of the RWhois enhancements currently underway. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 17 13:49:56 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 13:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Storing and Retrieving Justification Data Message-ID: During the web-based template demonstration at the recent Member Meeting, it was recommended that we provide a mechanism for the user to retrieve the 'Justification Section' from the last request, based upon Org ID. This would be very useful to both the membership and the Registration Services Department. However, since the initial release uses the WHOIS database, we could not implement this unless we put the justification information in WHOIS. Due to privacy concerns, we will not implement this. When ARIN creates a members-only website, this functionality can be revisited. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 17 14:03:19 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:03:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Handle Generation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Based on the discussions that took place during the Public Policy Meeting regarding handle generation, all network handles will have a sequence number. Ginny On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, ginny listman wrote: > As a feature of the new database, organizations will have full control > over their network and AS names. Therefore, network and AS names no longer > need to be unique. Also, it will be much easier for an organization to > change the network and AS names. For these reasons, we want to get away > from using the AS or network name to generate a unique handle. > > All future ASes will have a handle in the format of AS## where ## will be > the autonomous system number. In the case of AS blocks, it will be the > first in the block of autonomous system numbers. > > All future networks will have a handle of NET-##-##-##-##<-sequence> where > ## represents each of the 4 octets for v4 networks or the 8 16-bit > hexadecimal pieces for v6 networks, of the first IP address. For both v4 > and v6 networks, the will be applied only in the case of > duplicates, e.g., in the case of reassignments of the first portion of the > network. > > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > hinderance? > > Ginny Listman > Director of Engineering > ARIN > > From dbarger at swbell.net Wed Apr 17 14:21:15 2002 From: dbarger at swbell.net (Dave Barger) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 13:21:15 -0500 Subject: Handle Generation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20020417131327.00a64cd8@postoffice.swbell.net> > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > hinderance? Ginny, When you say you want to replace existing handles (I assume netnames), are you referring to netnames associated only with our ISP allocations from ARIN, or would you replace netnames for al of our customer reassignments as well? I'm in favor of replacing netnames for our allocations received from ARIN, but not a big fan of replacing netnames for our customer reassignments. Through our IP management tools, we are already generating netnames using the 4 octets of the network address, followed by a date format mmddyy. Dave Barger SBC Internet At 01:03 PM 4/17/2002, ginny listman wrote: >Based on the discussions that took place during the Public Policy Meeting >regarding handle generation, all network handles will have a sequence >number. > >Ginny > >On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > > As a feature of the new database, organizations will have full control > > over their network and AS names. Therefore, network and AS names no longer > > need to be unique. Also, it will be much easier for an organization to > > change the network and AS names. For these reasons, we want to get away > > from using the AS or network name to generate a unique handle. > > > > All future ASes will have a handle in the format of AS## where ## will be > > the autonomous system number. In the case of AS blocks, it will be the > > first in the block of autonomous system numbers. > > > > All future networks will have a handle of NET-##-##-##-##<-sequence> where > > ## represents each of the 4 octets for v4 networks or the 8 16-bit > > hexadecimal pieces for v6 networks, of the first IP address. For both v4 > > and v6 networks, the will be applied only in the case of > > duplicates, e.g., in the case of reassignments of the first portion of the > > network. > > > > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > > hinderance? > > > > Ginny Listman > > Director of Engineering > > ARIN > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 17 14:27:12 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:27:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Handle Generation In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20020417131327.00a64cd8@postoffice.swbell.net> Message-ID: Dave, We are not changing netnames. The netname is something that the customer generates or determines based on their internal procedure. We are changing the net handle, which is generated by the ARIN software. Currently it is based on the netname. In the future it will be based on the IP address. Ginny On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Dave Barger wrote: > > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > > hinderance? > > Ginny, > > When you say you want to replace existing handles (I assume netnames), > are you referring to netnames associated only with our ISP allocations > from ARIN, or would you replace netnames for al of our customer > reassignments as well? > > I'm in favor of replacing netnames for our allocations received from ARIN, but > not a big fan of replacing netnames for our customer reassignments. Through > our IP management tools, we are already generating netnames using the > 4 octets of the network address, followed by a date format mmddyy. > > Dave Barger > SBC Internet > > At 01:03 PM 4/17/2002, ginny listman wrote: > >Based on the discussions that took place during the Public Policy Meeting > >regarding handle generation, all network handles will have a sequence > >number. > > > >Ginny > > > >On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > > > > As a feature of the new database, organizations will have full control > > > over their network and AS names. Therefore, network and AS names no longer > > > need to be unique. Also, it will be much easier for an organization to > > > change the network and AS names. For these reasons, we want to get away > > > from using the AS or network name to generate a unique handle. > > > > > > All future ASes will have a handle in the format of AS## where ## will be > > > the autonomous system number. In the case of AS blocks, it will be the > > > first in the block of autonomous system numbers. > > > > > > All future networks will have a handle of NET-##-##-##-##<-sequence> where > > > ## represents each of the 4 octets for v4 networks or the 8 16-bit > > > hexadecimal pieces for v6 networks, of the first IP address. For both v4 > > > and v6 networks, the will be applied only in the case of > > > duplicates, e.g., in the case of reassignments of the first portion of the > > > network. > > > > > > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > > > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > > > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > > > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > > > hinderance? > > > > > > Ginny Listman > > > Director of Engineering > > > ARIN > > > > > > > > > From louie at equinix.com Wed Apr 17 14:30:07 2002 From: louie at equinix.com (Louis Lee) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:30:07 -0700 Subject: Handle Generation Message-ID: <4FA6CECCC8A3D41186F700B0D0784FF40108AC84@hq-exchange.corp.equinix.com> Dave, You should still be free to select your own netname for customer reassignments. The new handles will no longer be generated from the netnames that we submit in our requests/SWIPs to ARIN. Rather, they will be generated from the IP address itself. I presume that we should still be able to do lookups against both netnames and handles. But since netnames don't have to be unique anymore.... Louie ------------------------------------------------------- Louis Lee louie at equinix.com Staff Network Engineer office: 650/316-6162 Equinix, Inc. fax: 650/316-6903 http://www.equinix.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Barger [mailto:dbarger at swbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 11:21 AM To: ginny listman; dbwg at arin.net Subject: Re: Handle Generation > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > hinderance? Ginny, When you say you want to replace existing handles (I assume netnames), are you referring to netnames associated only with our ISP allocations from ARIN, or would you replace netnames for al of our customer reassignments as well? I'm in favor of replacing netnames for our allocations received from ARIN, but not a big fan of replacing netnames for our customer reassignments. Through our IP management tools, we are already generating netnames using the 4 octets of the network address, followed by a date format mmddyy. Dave Barger SBC Internet From markk at netsol.com Thu Apr 18 09:57:27 2002 From: markk at netsol.com (Mark Kosters) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:57:27 -0400 Subject: Handle Generation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20020418135727.GE1278@slam.admin.cto.netsol.com> On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 11:56:48AM -0500, ginny listman wrote: > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > hinderance? Hi Ginny This may be too complex to implement but I'll throw it out anyhow. When the state changes exit numbers on highways (from sequential to mileage based or vice-versa), they keep both numbers going from some time (new exit number above and old exit somewhere else on the sign). Could we do that with handles as well - keep both going for a while? Mark -- Mark Kosters markk at netsol.com Verisign Applied Research From ginny at arin.net Thu Apr 18 11:45:35 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 11:45:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Handle Generation In-Reply-To: <20020418135727.GE1278@slam.admin.cto.netsol.com> Message-ID: Mark, Implementing this would be complicated, and would be perpetuating the use of the old handles. How long is 'a while'? We may wind up keep the handles for years. What I propose would be to produce a list to map the new and old handles. This list would be publicly available via ftp. My only question would be - "Would you need to sign an AUP to get it?" Ginny On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Mark Kosters wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 11:56:48AM -0500, ginny listman wrote: > > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > > hinderance? > > Hi Ginny > > This may be too complex to implement but I'll throw it out anyhow. > When the state changes exit numbers on highways (from sequential to mileage > based or vice-versa), they keep both numbers going from some time (new exit > number above and old exit somewhere else on the sign). Could > we do that with handles as well - keep both going for a while? > > Mark > > -- > > Mark Kosters markk at netsol.com Verisign Applied Research > From markk at netsol.com Thu Apr 18 12:25:50 2002 From: markk at netsol.com (Mark Kosters) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 12:25:50 -0400 Subject: Handle Generation In-Reply-To: References: <20020418135727.GE1278@slam.admin.cto.netsol.com> Message-ID: <20020418162550.GE6898@slam.admin.cto.netsol.com> On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:45:35AM -0400, ginny listman wrote: > Implementing this would be complicated, and would be perpetuating the use > of the old handles. How long is 'a while'? We may wind up keep the > handles for years. If it is deemed a good idea, I'm sure we can come up with something. > What I propose would be to produce a list to map the new and old handles. > This list would be publicly available via ftp. My only question would be - > "Would you need to sign an AUP to get it?" Probably not. Mark From memsvcs at arin.net Thu Apr 18 15:46:47 2002 From: memsvcs at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 15:46:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: ARIN 2002 Database and Template Conversion Message-ID: In order to provide assistance prior to the deployment of the new data base and templates, ARIN has created a web page dedicated to this effort. It includes links to previous discussions about the database conversion, template revisions, and existing training materials. This page will be updated regularly so please check back from time to time for new information. ARIN Template Conversion Information Center: http://www.arin.net/template_conversion/index.html ARIN staff is available to provide regional training to facilitate the transition, such as that presented at ARIN IX, and asks for interested parties to contact training at arin.net with the number of potential attendees and suggested training locations. ARIN Member Services From louie at equinix.com Wed Apr 17 14:30:07 2002 From: louie at equinix.com (Louis Lee) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:30:07 -0700 Subject: Handle Generation Message-ID: <4FA6CECCC8A3D41186F700B0D0784FF40108AC84@hq-exchange.corp.equinix.com> Dave, You should still be free to select your own netname for customer reassignments. The new handles will no longer be generated from the netnames that we submit in our requests/SWIPs to ARIN. Rather, they will be generated from the IP address itself. I presume that we should still be able to do lookups against both netnames and handles. But since netnames don't have to be unique anymore.... Louie ------------------------------------------------------- Louis Lee louie at equinix.com Staff Network Engineer office: 650/316-6162 Equinix, Inc. fax: 650/316-6903 http://www.equinix.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Barger [mailto:dbarger at swbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 11:21 AM To: ginny listman; dbwg at arin.net Subject: Re: Handle Generation > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > hinderance? Ginny, When you say you want to replace existing handles (I assume netnames), are you referring to netnames associated only with our ISP allocations from ARIN, or would you replace netnames for al of our customer reassignments as well? I'm in favor of replacing netnames for our allocations received from ARIN, but not a big fan of replacing netnames for our customer reassignments. Through our IP management tools, we are already generating netnames using the 4 octets of the network address, followed by a date format mmddyy. Dave Barger SBC Internet From louie at equinix.com Wed Apr 17 14:30:07 2002 From: louie at equinix.com (Louis Lee) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:30:07 -0700 Subject: Handle Generation Message-ID: <4FA6CECCC8A3D41186F700B0D0784FF40108AC84@hq-exchange.corp.equinix.com> Dave, You should still be free to select your own netname for customer reassignments. The new handles will no longer be generated from the netnames that we submit in our requests/SWIPs to ARIN. Rather, they will be generated from the IP address itself. I presume that we should still be able to do lookups against both netnames and handles. But since netnames don't have to be unique anymore.... Louie ------------------------------------------------------- Louis Lee louie at equinix.com Staff Network Engineer office: 650/316-6162 Equinix, Inc. fax: 650/316-6903 http://www.equinix.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Barger [mailto:dbarger at swbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 11:21 AM To: ginny listman; dbwg at arin.net Subject: Re: Handle Generation > To make the database more uniform and to completely disassociate handle > usage from network and AS names, we would also like to replace existing > handles with this new format. How many of you out there are attached to > the existing handles? Will changing existing handles be a benefit or a > hinderance? Ginny, When you say you want to replace existing handles (I assume netnames), are you referring to netnames associated only with our ISP allocations from ARIN, or would you replace netnames for al of our customer reassignments as well? I'm in favor of replacing netnames for our allocations received from ARIN, but not a big fan of replacing netnames for our customer reassignments. Through our IP management tools, we are already generating netnames using the 4 octets of the network address, followed by a date format mmddyy. Dave Barger SBC Internet From Jay.Karlin at dig.com Wed Apr 24 00:28:41 2002 From: Jay.Karlin at dig.com (Jason Karlin) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 21:28:41 -0700 Subject: new templates Message-ID: <9491D30B9C4DD6119EC0009027C39A0619DA0E@sea-ex0.starwave.com> I am interested in more information about the format of the new templates. I work for the Disney Internet Group and would also be interested in being a beta tester (depending on the qualifications). Please contact me with any further information you have. Sincerly, Jason Karlin Software Engineer II Disney Internet Group Seattle, WA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 24 08:12:03 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:12:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: new templates In-Reply-To: <9491D30B9C4DD6119EC0009027C39A0619DA0E@sea-ex0.starwave.com> Message-ID: Jason, Please visit the website detailing the conversion: http://www.arin.net/template_conversion/index.html If this does not provide you with the answers you are looking for, please let me know. As far as beta testing, I have added you to the list, and will be contacting you when testing is available. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Jason Karlin wrote: > I am interested in more information about the format of the new templates. > I work for the Disney Internet Group and would also be interested in being a > beta tester (depending on the qualifications). Please contact me with any > further information you have. > Sincerly, > Jason Karlin > > Software Engineer II > Disney Internet Group > Seattle, WA > From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 24 08:30:30 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Adminstrative Contact Message-ID: During the recent Member Meeting there was much discussion about displaying the various POCs in WHOIS. There was strong sentiment against displaying the adminstrative contacts. Much of this was due to the fact that ARIN is strongly encouraging that the admin be a real person, with a personal email address (versus role accounts). There was also some debate on whether or not to display the technical contacts, which may or may not be a role. Does limiting the display of the POCs that are responsible for the resource go against the spirit of RFC 2050? It reads, "Registration: Provision of a public registry documenting address space allocation and assignment. This is necessary to ensure uniqueness and to provide information for Internet trouble shooting at all levels." The proposed design of WHOIS will only display the administrative contact for an org query. In other words, when querying an AS number or network, the admin is not displayed. The data would be stored in WHOIS, but you would need to know to look to the org to get it. Is this the model that we should be implementing, or completely remove the admin so that only ARIN staff can display it internally? Once we know the direction of the admin POC, I will pose questions regarding the technical contact. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN From linda at sat-tel.com Wed Apr 24 09:18:06 2002 From: linda at sat-tel.com (Linda) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:18:06 -0400 Subject: Adminstrative Contact References: Message-ID: <3CC6B08D.38547AE7@sat-tel.com> Good Morning, I do not have a problem with the admin contact being displayed in the whois database. We do not currently use role accounts for any of our POC's as we are a smaller company with few individuals that submit information. What would be the benefit if ARIN were to completely remove the admin contact from the database? Would ARIN staff then be responsible for anyone inquiring information on an ADMIN contact? I do not see the benefit of this. Regards, Linda Werner ginny listman wrote: > During the recent Member Meeting there was much discussion about > displaying the various POCs in WHOIS. There was strong sentiment against > displaying the adminstrative contacts. Much of this was due to the fact > that ARIN is strongly encouraging that the admin be a real person, with a > personal email address (versus role accounts). There was also some debate > on whether or not to display the technical contacts, which may or may not > be a role. > > Does limiting the display of the POCs that are responsible for the > resource go against the spirit of RFC 2050? It reads, "Registration: > Provision of a public registry documenting address space allocation and > assignment. This is necessary to ensure uniqueness and to provide > information for Internet trouble shooting at all levels." > > The proposed design of WHOIS will only display the administrative contact > for an org query. In other words, when querying an AS number or network, > the admin is not displayed. The data would be stored in WHOIS, but you > would need to know to look to the org to get it. Is this the model that > we should be implementing, or completely remove the admin so that only > ARIN staff can display it internally? > > Once we know the direction of the admin POC, I will pose questions > regarding the technical contact. > > Ginny Listman > Director of Engineering > ARIN From luis.aliaga at attla.com Wed Apr 24 13:24:26 2002 From: luis.aliaga at attla.com (Aliaga, Luis Carlos - (Per)) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 12:24:26 -0500 Subject: BETA TESTER AND NEW TEMPLATES FOR POC's Message-ID: Hi, I'm Luis Aliaga from AT&T's ISP in Per?. I am interested in being a beta tester for ARIN's new database. By the way, I'd like to know when we can send you a request to create new multiples POC's Please contact me with any further information you have. Thanks, > Luis Aliaga Arias > Core Internet Chief > AT&T Latin America > C Direcci?n - Jr. Chinchon 910 San Isidro- Lima 27 > * Tel?fono 51 (1) 610 - 5555 anexo 2852 > * E-mail: luis.aliaga at attla.com > Cualquier opini?n vertida en este mensaje es > personal y no representa la posici?n oficial de > AT&T Latin America - Per? > > From ginny at arin.net Wed Apr 24 15:20:54 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 15:20:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: BETA TESTER AND NEW TEMPLATES FOR POC's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Luis, I will add you to the beta testers list that I have been keeping. As far as creating new multiple POCs, let me first talk about what happened at the Member's Meeting in Las Vegas. We provided a report by maintainer to all attending members detailing all the information that is stored in WHOIS. An explanation of how to read this report and how to make changes to your data is detailed in the "Getting a Jumpstart on Your Org ID" presentation. The purpose of the report and presentation, was to show how to take advantage of the benefits of the new database, including multiple POCs. We will be providing an updated version of this report available in early May, to all members including those who weren't able to attend the meeting. Having said that, you can submit the new POC templates to the jumpstart at arin.net role account. The new POCs will be created and the POC handle sent to you. However, you will not be able to associate the POCs with the resources until conversion. You can submit the proper template for example a netmod that adds the POCs to the jumpstart account, and it will be processed immediately following conversion. Hope I answered more questions that I raised. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Aliaga, Luis Carlos - (Per) wrote: > Hi, > > I'm Luis Aliaga from AT&T's ISP in Per?. I am interested in being a beta > tester for ARIN's new database. By the way, I'd like to know when we can > send you a request to create new multiples POC's > > Please contact me with any further information you have. > > Thanks, > > > > Luis Aliaga Arias > > Core Internet Chief > > AT&T Latin America > > C Direcci?n - Jr. Chinchon 910 San Isidro- Lima 27 > > * Tel?fono 51 (1) 610 - 5555 anexo 2852 > > * E-mail: luis.aliaga at attla.com > > Cualquier opini?n vertida en este mensaje es > > personal y no representa la posici?n oficial de > > AT&T Latin America - Per? > > > > > From dbarger at swbell.net Thu Apr 25 09:41:13 2002 From: dbarger at swbell.net (Dave Barger) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 08:41:13 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20020425083748.00a5b320@postoffice.swbell.net> Ginny, When the new Whois and templates are rolled out, will ARIN provide any backward compatibility for the old templates, at least for a short period? Thanks. Dave Barger SBC Internet Services -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginny at arin.net Thu Apr 25 11:13:33 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:13:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20020425083748.00a5b320@postoffice.swbell.net> Message-ID: Dave, Assuming that your are referring to SWIP templates, we will be providing a utility to convert old SWIPs to the new format. This is something that you would download and run against your SWIPs prior to sending them in. If we receive templates of the old format after conversion, they will be rejected with a message stating where to get the conversion utility. Just a couple of things to keep in mind: - The SWIP process currently handled by a one template will be handled by four templates. The utility will make some assumptions based on what is provided in the template. - If it is a modify or delete, it will create the Netmod template. If you are changing the POC, the new template requires the POC handle. If one does not exist, you will have to submit a POC template. - If it is an assignment without in-addrs, it will assume it is a Simple Reassignment. The POC information will be dropped. - If it is an assignment with in-addrs, it will assume it is a Detailed Reassignment. Unless you edit the file, and provide a 'Downstream Org ID', a new one would be generated. The POC will be associated with the Org and not the resource. - If it is a allocation, it will assume it is a Reallocation. Unless you edit the file, and provide a 'Downstream Org ID', a new one will be generated. The POC will be associated with the Org and not the resource. Ginny On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Dave Barger wrote: > Ginny, > > When the new Whois and templates are rolled out, will ARIN provide any > backward compatibility for the old templates, at least for a short period? > > Thanks. > > > Dave Barger > SBC Internet Services > From ginny at arin.net Thu Apr 25 11:13:33 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:13:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20020425083748.00a5b320@postoffice.swbell.net> Message-ID: Dave, Assuming that your are referring to SWIP templates, we will be providing a utility to convert old SWIPs to the new format. This is something that you would download and run against your SWIPs prior to sending them in. If we receive templates of the old format after conversion, they will be rejected with a message stating where to get the conversion utility. Just a couple of things to keep in mind: - The SWIP process currently handled by a one template will be handled by four templates. The utility will make some assumptions based on what is provided in the template. - If it is a modify or delete, it will create the Netmod template. If you are changing the POC, the new template requires the POC handle. If one does not exist, you will have to submit a POC template. - If it is an assignment without in-addrs, it will assume it is a Simple Reassignment. The POC information will be dropped. - If it is an assignment with in-addrs, it will assume it is a Detailed Reassignment. Unless you edit the file, and provide a 'Downstream Org ID', a new one would be generated. The POC will be associated with the Org and not the resource. - If it is a allocation, it will assume it is a Reallocation. Unless you edit the file, and provide a 'Downstream Org ID', a new one will be generated. The POC will be associated with the Org and not the resource. Ginny On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Dave Barger wrote: > Ginny, > > When the new Whois and templates are rolled out, will ARIN provide any > backward compatibility for the old templates, at least for a short period? > > Thanks. > > > Dave Barger > SBC Internet Services >