- db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

DRAFT input for the RIPE database on NSAP addresses for SURFnet bv
by Victor Reijs 18 Mar '94

18 Mar '94

Hello all of you, Below you find the DRAFT entries for CLNS domain for SURFnet bv. There are still some open ends: - I introduced the guardian list: clns-domain-guardian. This because the IP and CLNS guardians coudl be different persons/organisations. What is the idea of RIPE for this? - I changed the responsibility of entry with relation to my earlier mail. It now seems to be more alligned with the existing IP world. - Marcel, are you still pushing ISO to include the top-levels of NSAP domains in the RIPe database? Together with the DUtch NSO (NNI) we could jointly put presure on ISO. - I am trying to get the Dutch NSO (NNI) involved in their entries. - syntax checking is, I assume, not yet their (including logical checking, like bis info, domain info, routing info, etc.). The CLNS coordination group will have to look at that. Marcel? If people have remarks to the below entries, please let me know. I plan to input the entries next week in the RIPE database. All the best, Victor - ---- remark: I introduced the a new guardian address for CLNS-domains. remark: it is: clns-domain-gaurdian@... dom-prefix: 39 dom-name: AFI for ISO-DCC NSAP address scheme (binary DSP syntax) admin-c: someone from ISO guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 remark: Just to start the hierarchy in the RIPE database, this record remark: has been temporarily made by someone else then ISO. remark: In future this record must be ownded by ISO. dom-prefix: 38 dom-name: AFI for ISO-DCC NSAP address scheme (decimal DSP syntax) admin-c: someone from ISO guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 remark: Just to start the hierarchy in the RIPE database, this record remark: has been temporarily made by someone else then ISO. remark: In future this record must be ownded by ISO. dom-prefix: 39.528f dom-name: DCC NSAP address scheme for the Netherlands (binary DSP syntax) desc: NNI desc: Postbus 5059 desc: 2600 GB Delft desc: The Netherlands admin-c: someone from NNI guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 remark: Just to start the hierarchy in the RIPE database, this record remark: has been temporarily made by someone else then NNI. remark: In future this record must be ownded by NNI. dom-prefix: 38.528 dom-name: DCC NSAP address scheme for the Netherlands (decimal DSP syntax ) desc: NNI desc: Postbus 5059 desc: 2600 GB Delft desc: The Netherlands admin-c: someone from NNI guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 remark: Just to start the hierarchy in the RIPE database, this record remark: has been temporarily made by someone else then NNI. remark: In future this record must be ownded by NNI. dom-prefix: 38.5281.100 dom-name: SURFnet-CLNS domain (decimal DSP syntax) descr: SURFnet bv descr: P.O. Box 19035 descr: 3501 DA Urecht descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100 dom-name: SURFnet-CLNS domain (binary DSP syntax) descr: SURFnet bv descr: P.O. Box 19035 descr: 3501 DA Urecht descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs.surfnet.nl tech-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.1000.10 dom-name: CLNS domain for DECnet IV and DECnet/OSI descr: SURFnet bv descr: P.O. Box 19035 descr: 3501 DA Urecht descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: pve(a)kub.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.1000.20 descr: CLNS domain for SURFnet CLNS test backbone descr: SURFnet bv descr: P.O. Box 19035 descr: 3501 DA Urecht descr: The Netherlands bis: 39.528f.1100.1000.2000.0000.0001.0000.0c04.29b4.00 39.528f.1103 dom-in: 39.528f.1103 100 ANY AND NOT 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-in: 39.528f.1100000910 100 39528f1100000910 dom-out: 39.528f.1103 39528f1100 AND NOT 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-out: 39.528f.1100.0009.10 39.528f.1100 default: 39.528f.1103 10 admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: henk_steenman(a)sara.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.1000.30 dom-name: CLNS domain for SURFnet CLNS production backbone descr: SURFnet bv descr: P.O. Box 19035 descr: 3501 DA Urecht descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: henk_steenman(a)sara.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-name: CLNS domain of SARA descr: SARA descr: Kruislaan 415 descr: 1098 SJ Amsterdam descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: Henk_steenman(a)sara.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.0000.90 dom-name: CLNS domain of TU Delft descr: TU Delft descr: Michiel de Ruyterweg 10-12 descr: 2628 BA Delft descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: B.Zorn(a)ET.TUDelft.NL guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.0012.30 dim-name: CLNS domain of SURFnet bv desc: SURFnet bv desc: P.O. Box 19035 desc: 3501 DA Urecht desc: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-name: PTT Research - TUBA/CLNS Testnetwork descr: PTT Research descr: St. Paulusstraat 4 descr: P.O. Box 421 descr: Leidschendam descr: The Netherlands bis: 39.528f.1100.0009.1000.0000.0040.0000.0c03.df7d.00 39.528f.1100.1000.20 bis: 39.528f.1100.0009.1000.0000.0040.0000.0c04.5eaf.00 39.528f.1103 dom-in: 39.528f.1100.1000.20 39.528f.1100 dom-in: 39.528f.1103 ANY AND NOT 39.528f.1100 dom-out: 39.528f.1100.1000.20 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-out: 39.528f.1103 39.528f.1100.0009.10 default: 39.528f.1103 10 admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: A.A.L.Reijnierse(a)research.ptt.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: A.A.L.Reijnierse(a)research.ptt.nl 940228 dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100.001.10 dom-name: CLNS domain of KUB descr: KUB descr: Hogeschoollaan 225 descr: 5037 GC Tilburg descr: The Netherlands admin-c: Victor.Reijs(a)surfnet.nl tech-c: martin(a)kub.nl guardian: clns-domain-guardian(a)nic.surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: victor.reijs(a)surfnet.nl 940228 ------- End of Forwarded Message

4 6

Re: draft Dutch RIPE entries
by Victor Reijs 17 Mar '94

17 Mar '94

------- Forwarded Message Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 22:22:07 +0100 From: Victor Reijs <Victor.Reijs(a)SURFnet.nl> To: Susan Hares <skh(a)merit.edu> cc: epg(a)merit.edu, jyy(a)merit.edu, sn3plus-clns(a)SURFnet.nl Subject: Re: draft Dutch RIPe entries ==> From: Susan Hares > Victor: > > Thanks for the entries. However, the reason I wanted > to reconsider the top 39,47 entries is that they > are "summary" routes. No one AS (or RDI as the ISO INdeed, these are more there so let people know that someone is responsible for the above level. > folks in IDRP call it.) has this within it's bounds. > So, we must treat it more like an aggregate. > > I think that perhaps we really need to re-emphasize > the difference between RDI and iso prefixes. > > Did my concern come across in the other mail? > I'll be glad to chat with Hank. > Certainly, that is also the reason why I posted the message to Henk. He is the writer of the document, so I think he also should react. I indeed hope that you both will start chating;-) > OSI route and IP routes should be of the same > type of information, just different formats for > the addresses. Did that make sense to you? That is also my idea. I know there is somesemantic difference in wording, but lets try to make things as analgue as possible (beut difference should be stressed, that no confusing will start!). Two things are for me VERY important when using the RIPE database. It is with regard to 'consent' during database updates by differnet people from different hierarchical layers: - - when somebody inputs a NEW entry below another entry (seen in hierarchy), the highest should get a message about that update. Remark: I still see the 'first somebody' as the guardian of its inputted record! - - somebody is NOT allowed to change the routing in their record without the approval of the higher hierarchy. This to guard that no routing loops will occur. What do people think about this!!! So this message was about two things: - - the document of Henk. Please Henk and Sue try to get concensis. - - the autorisation mechanism ([preferrable automatic] checking tools) during the input session for the RIPE database. Please database-workgroup react on this. All the best, Victor > > Sue ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Routing prefixes in the RIPE database?
by Havard Eidnes 11 Mar '94

11 Mar '94

Sorry to those of you who see this twice, I mis-spelt one of the addresses and want both groups to receive copies of any resulting discussion. - Havard ------------------------------ Message-Id: <9403092125.AA28955@ravn> To: routing-wg(a)ripe.net Cc: db-gw(a)ripe.net, hostmaster(a)sunet.se, hostmaster(a)uninett.no Subject: Routing prefixes in the RIPE database? Date: Wed, 09 Mar 1994 22:25:48 +0100 From: Havard Eidnes <Havard.Eidnes(a)runit.sintef.no> Hi, all. I've been thinking about what we should do wrt. routing prefixes that are not "natural" network numbers, ie. what should be done about CIDR routes. This was prompted by fear that the Merit people would get "confused" because the routing prefixes we send in NACRs for these days are not directly found in the RIPE database, but it would perhaps also make sense as seen from a general perspective to register routing prefixes (ie. CIDR routes) in the RIPE database. Point for discussion: 1) should we try to register routing prefixes as such in the RIPE database? I know some argue that should not be necessary, eg. with the counter- argument being "you can use 'show ip bgp <prefix>' and thereby inspect the 'aggregator' attribute to get a handle on where to direct trouble reports" etc. etc. However, this only works as long as the prefix is reachable, so... Also, how will this show up in the BGP routing table if it isn't really BGP routes which are aggregated, but the aggregate is "locally originated" in the AS in question? If I am correct in my guesses here, this all points in the direction of registering the prefixes administratively. If there is consensus that we should try to register routing prefixes in the database, I have the following proposals/suggestions: 2) the routing prefix should be a separate object from the "inetnum" object. The reasoning behind this is that "inetnum" is mostly used for registering assignments of natural network numbers -- the ranges registered are not always of power-of-2 size, so cannot be represented as a single routing prefix. I suggest "rout-pfx" as long-form name. 3) the format when registering a routing prefix could be <IP-prefix>/<bitlen>, eg. "129.240/15" or "129.241.0.0/15" or the obvious in-between. 4) lookup of a "natural IP network number" with WHOIS in the RIPE database should give as result all the routing prefixes it is a part of, as well as the traditional "inetnum" output. Hint for implementation in the RIPE database: from a routing prefix eg. "129.240/15" create keys for all the natural IP network numbers covered by this prefix with pointers to the routing prefix object. This should be a fairly straight-forward approach (say I who haven't really hacked on the RIPE software... ;-) Side-effect: lookup of unassigned network numbers within a routing prefix after this change will no longer give the "No entries found for the selected source(s)" result when whois is used, but instead the routing prefix(es) will be returned, but no inetnum object. I haven't really thought much about what attributes the "rout-pfx" object should/could contain -- there probably shouldn't be all that many, and we can probably give a pointer for recursion via the AS where the aggregate is originated (and we all have our ASes registered, right? ;-). Comments? - Havard

5 5

NSAP address registration/authorization
by Victor Reijs 25 Feb '94

25 Feb '94

Hello all of you, Because we now have the RIPE database, I am investigating how we could registrate the addressing including defining the authorities. I hope to do thing together with the NNI (the NSO of the Netherlands). What do I have in mind (and please provide you remarks on this!): - I define 'domain' in this case as: part of the NSAP address starting at the beginning of the NSAP address and ending at some hierarchical point in the NSAP address structure. - - try to stimulate ISO, to put in the top level 'domains' in the RIPE database. They are the 'domain' authority of e.g. 38, 38, 47, etc. So dom-prefix, dom-name, descr, admin-c, source, remark, changed and guardian are under authority of ISO. No routing info is allowed. - try to stimulate ISO to put in the 'domains' that are part of the authority of ISO, e.g. 38 xxx (where XXX is DCC). So every country (like Holland) gets an entry in the RIPE database. So dom-prefix, dom-name, descr, admin-c, source, remark, changed, guardian are under authority of ISO. tech-c could be under authority of NSO. No routing info is allowed. - try to stimulate BSI to put in 'domain' 47 xxx (where xxx= ICD). So every international organization (like NORDUNET) gets an RIPE database entry. So dom-prefix, dom-name, descr, admin-c, source, remark, changed and guardian are under authority of BSI. tech-c could be under authority of intern. organization. No routing info is allowed. - - try to stimulate the NSO (in case of DCC, like NNI, AFNOR) to input their 'domains'. So every national organization (like SURFnet bv) gets an entry in the database. So dom-prefix, dom-name, descr, admin-c, source, remark, changed and guardian are under authority of NSO. Routing information will be given under authority of the national organization. tech-c could be under authority of national organization. - - the national organization (like SURFnet bv) inputs its 'domains' in the RIPE database. So every institute/etc. (like SARA) gets an entry. So dom-prefix, dom-name, descr, admin-c, source, remark, changed and guardian are under authority of nat. organization. tech-c could be under authority of institute. Routing information (if different from the nat.organization) can inputed by insitute, only with the consent of the nat. organization. So NO change may be made to this information without agreement with national organization. Remark: I interpretated 'guardian' as a person that gets information when something is changed. I think no more leveling is needed. If so let me know. Is the above scene workable? All the best, Victor

1 0

New Document available: ripe-108
by RIPE NCC Document Annoucement Service 11 Feb '94

11 Feb '94

New/Revised RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A revised/new document is available from the RIPE document store. Ref: ripe-108 Title: Support of Guarded fields within the RIPE Database Author: Tony Bates Date: 11 February 1994 Format: PS=45180 TXT=18019 bytes Obsoletes: Obsoleted by: Updates: Updated by: Old: Short content description ------------------------- This document describes an overview of the RIPE database attributes which are guarded, the procedure for updating these guarded attri- butes and the general use of "guarded" fields within the RIPE data- base. FTP Access ---------- All RIPE documents and Internet RFC`s are available via anonymous FTP from host ftp.ripe.net. Type "ftp ftp.ripe.net". Login with username "anonymous" supplying your email address as the password. After logging in, type "cd ripe/docs/ripe-docs" followed by the command "get filename". The relevant filenames for this document are: ripe-108.txt for the ASCII version ripe-108.ps for the PostScript version Electronic Mail Retrieval of Documents -------------------------------------- Documents can also be retrieved from the RIPE document store using a mail server program. For more information on how to use the program, send email to: mail-server(a)ripe.net with "send HELP" in the body text. RIPE NCC Interactive Information Server --------------------------------------- Type "telnet info.ripe.net". This is a menu driven service allows the document store to be browsed. After reading documents you are prompted as to whether you would like to receive an email copy of the document you have just read. If you would, you simply enter your email address and the document will be mailed to you. Below are details of alternative methods of access. Gopher Access ------------- The same documents are available via a "gopher" server at "gopher gopher.ripe.net". WAIS Access ----------- There is also a "WAIS" server at wais.ripe.net, where there is a WAIS index for RIPE documents "ripe-docs.src" WWW Access ---------- For those who wish to add this home page at the RIPE NCC to their own customized home pages, it can be accessed as: http://www.ripe.net MIME Mail Reader ---------------- Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the RIPE document. SEND ripe/docs/ripe-docs/ripe-108.txt

1 0

Guarded Attributes (IMPORTANT)
by Marten Terpstra 03 Feb '94

03 Feb '94

[Apologies for wide distribution, think it is important though] Folks, Please find below a slightly updated version of the guarded attribute procedure document. For those of you who manage an AS, please not that starting coming Monday, the aut-sys field in the network object will become guarded, and can only be updated thru the procedure described below. We have created accounts for all ASes we currently see routed in Europe, and if you do not have your account yet, please come and get it as soon as possible and check out the files we have created for you. Please send requests for these accounts to <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Also if you know some of your AS neighbors have not got their account yet, and are perhaps not on any of these lists, pass this message. If you have questions, send them to ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net as well, or directly to me. -Marten Support of Guarded fields within the RIPE Database * FINAL DRAFT * Tony Bates Document-ID: ripe-1nn 1. Introduction The RIPE database contains several significant attributes which make it well suited for use as part of operational procedures and confi- guration. Most significantly are the attributes which make up the RIPE Routing Registry (RR) as specified in RIPE-81 [1][2], namely the "aut-sys" and "comm-list" attributes. For these attributes to be of use to service providers they must be: o Properly authorised. o Efficient for both maintainers of the attributes and the main- tainers of the whole database. This document describes an overview of the RIPE database attributes which are guarded, the procedure for updating these guarded attri- butes and the general use of "guarded" fields within the RIPE data- base. 2. The Database Guarded Attributes All the guarded attributes currently supported in the RIPE database are contained within the "inetnum" or network object. However, the association corresponds to their relevant guarded database objects. If we look at a simple example this becomes clear: inetnum: 192.87.45.0 netname: RIPE-NCC descr: RIPE Network Coordination Centre descr: Amsterdam, Netherlands country: NL admin-c: Daniel Karrenberg tech-c: Marten Terpstra connect: RIPE NSF WCW ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 2 - aut-sys: AS1104 comm-list: SURFNET ias-int: 192.87.45.80 AS1104 ias-int: 192.87.45.6 AS2122 ias-int: 192.87.45.254 AS2600 rev-srv: ns.ripe.net rev-srv: ns.eu.net notify: ops(a)ripe.net changed: tony(a)ripe.net 940110 source: RIPE This shows that the RIPE-NCC network belongs to autonomous system 1104 and is in a community known as SURFNET. This is valuable infor- mation that could easily be used for example for routing policy pur- poses (as well as other operational uses). Currently support for the following set of guarded attributes is implemented: aut-sys The "aut-sys" attribute has a direct mapping to "aut-num" objects as defined in RIPE-81. That is the Autonomous System (AS) that the network number is a part of. As defined in RIPE- 81, a network can only belong to one AS and hence the "aut-sys" attribute can only contain one AS number. The syntax of the "aut-sys" attribute is: AS<positive integer between 1 and 65535> (1). i.e. AS1104 comm-list The "comm-list" attribute has a direct mapping to "community" objects as defined in RIPE-81. A network can belong to more than one community. The syntax of "comm-list" is: Multiple text strings which cannot start with "AS" or any of the <routing policy expression> KEYWORDS defined in RIPE-81. routpr-l (2) The "routpr-l" attribute has a direct mapping to "rout-pr" objects as defined in RIPE-60 [4]. Networks can belong to more than one routing privilege. The list of networks within a rout- ing privilege represents the group of networks accepted/allowed by a set of routers described by the information in the "rout- pr" object. The syntax for "routpr-l" is as follows: _________________________ (1) This represents a change from RIPE-50 [3] where the "aut-sys" attribute was defined to be a positive integer only, not containing the string "AS" at the start. This change has been made to be consistent with the "aut-num" object syntax. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 3 - Multiple text strings representing the routing privilege. bdrygw-l The "bdrygw-l" attribute has a direct mapping to "bdry-gw" objects as defined in RIPE-60 [4]. Networks can belong to more than one boundary gateway. The list of networks within a boun- dary gateway represents the group of networks advertised by a set of routers described by the information in the "bdry-gw" object. The syntax for "bdrygw-l" is as follows: Multiple text strings representing the boundary gateways iden- tification. As these attributes are tightly coupled to their associated objects it makes sense for these attributes to be updated not by the network maintainer but by the maintainer of the referenced object(s). The basic premise behind this is that these attributes should be used for various operational procedures such as setting routing policy, accounting and so on. For these attributes to be used by network operators for day to day operations they need to be guarded in such a way that can be trusted and are guaranteed to be unique - with any conflicts quickly and easily resolved. The procedure for achieving this is detailed below. 3. The Basic Procedure For each of the guarded attributes detailed above, a list of all networks having this attribute is kept separately from the general database itself. These lists (also called `guarded files') will be maintained and be served as the `only' source of membership informa- tion used in the database. Normal database updates `never' change these attributes. If an update includes such an attribute and a discrepancy between the values in the update and those in the data- base is found, a diagnostic message will be sent to the originator of the update and the guarded value(s) will not be affected. The attributes as defined in these files are incorporated in the data- base once a day. To ensure proper control and authorisation, these lists will be maintained at the RIPE NCC on the same machine that contains the RIPE database. The "guardians" of the corresponding database objects will have to maintain their own guarded files. The guardians are provided with individually assigned login accounts at the RIPE NCC. The guardians can themselves decide in what manner they want to update their file. The NCC will offer interactive logins, ftp logins or any other means that might be deemed useful. _________________________ (2) It should be noted that both "routpr-l" and "bdrygw-l" attributes have been agreed to be phased out in preference of the "aut-sys" and "comm-list" attri- butes as soon as the `guarded field' mechanism is in place. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 4 - 3.1. Some Details As stated each guardian will be issued with an account on the cen- tral NCC machine known as `guardian.ripe.net'. This account will contain a `restricted' environment which will allow the guardian of the relevant object to update their associated guardian file (3). Wherever possible the account name issued to the guardian will be the same as the object name. For example, the guardian of the AS1104 aut-num object will receive an account known as "AS1104". With each guardian account the corresponding file will be parsed at each update run (once a day). This file will contain the list on networks associated with the object. See appendix A for details of the format and syntax of the guardian files. A tool will also be provided within the restricted environment to syntax check the guarded file to avoid against possible typos and errors. With each account, an electronic mail address (this is a mandatory attribute for all guarded objects) will be used by the NCC and data- base software. To make this flexible for the guardian a ".forward" file with the account which can be change when required. This will mean mail sent to <guardian-name(a)guardian.ripe.net> will go the to correct guardian. 3.2. How does it work ? For each of the guarded files found on `guardian.ripe.net' the data- base software will load any guarded attribute value(s) for the net- work object(s) listed in the guarded file. This will take place at the same time as the database is garbage collected (currently at 0500 MET). If a conflict is found (i.e if more than one entry exists for an attribute which can only contain one entry, currently only "aut-sys" contains this property), the current value will remain unchanged and all guardians involved in the conflict will be sent an electronic mail message informing them of the conflict. See Appendix B for an example. If no conflict is found the attribute will be updated with the guarded value. Correspondingly, to remove a guarded attribute just remove the net- work entry from the relevant guarded file and it will be deleted at the next update run. To be notified of this delete the "notify" attribute should be used. _________________________ (3) As stated, the mechanism for updating the guardi- an file will initially be by interactive login or file transfer. However, this doesn't preclude other mechan- isms in the future. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 5 - If a guardian file contains an entry which is not in the database then the guardian will be notified as part of the conflict handling procedure. If an update is sent to the database software using another mechan- ism (i.e. mail to auto-dbm(a)ripe.net) that contains a guarded attri- bute, this will not be allowed to change the guarded attribute. If the value of the attribute is the same as what is currently registered in the database then no warnings will be given. However, if the update contains a value for a guarded attribute that is dif- ferent to that registered in the database, a warning will be sent to the originator and the guarded value will remain unchanged. Any changes of other (unguarded) fields in the update will be checked for syntactic correctness and if they pass will go through to the database irrespective of any conflicts for the guarded fields. When through the normal database update procedure an object with guarded attributes is deleted, the guardians of these guarded attri- butes will be notified of this deletion. Only deletions will be notified in this way to guardians. For normal changes the "notify" attribute of the database should be used. Although the guarded process will run once a day as part of the database garbage collection procedure it will also be possible to, "on request to the NCC", run an emergency guarded update process for a particular guarded object. To have complete guardian accounts removed from the NCC machine, and thus all references to this guarded value, please contact the RIPE NCC at <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Removing an account and the guardian file that goes with it means that this guarded value will not be added any longer to any of the objects in the database. 4. Getting it started As this is a new (and much needed, especially for the "aut-sys" attribute) mechanism, a degree of `bootstrapping' is needed to make it easier for network providers and IRs to transition to using the guarded file procedure. The NCC has built an automated generation scheme for attributes that are known to be in use (currently, this means AS numbers). For all the AS numbers seen to be routed in Europe, accounts for the guardians have already been put in place having the guardian's mailbox point to a mailbox at the RIPE NCC. For these ASs currently guarded files are generated on a daily basis by analyzing European full routing tables. This means there could (and almost certainly will) be some conflicts within the generated guardian files. As soon as the account is handed over, the auto-generation for that guardian account stops and the mailbox is changed to the correct guardian mailbox. Guardians can of course make use of the auto- generated guarded files if they wish to check against their own records. From the moment of `hand-over' it is now the guardians responsibility to make sure their associated network(s) get the ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 6 - correct guarded attributes by listing them in the guarded files. The advantage of having this `bootstrap' method is that it will allow population of the guarded "aut-sys" attribute to take place immediately this functionality is enabled in the RIPE database software. It also acts as an incentive for networks operators and local IR's to transition to the guarded file procedure as soon as possible. 5. Conclusion The update procedure as detailed above has the following advantages: o Authorisation of adding/deleting is guaranteed. o No need for mailing back and forth of authorisation messages. o Simple procedure for both database maintainers and guardians. o Guardians keep full control of their attribute. It allows for the addition of any number of guarded attributes in the future. It describes a simple but effective procedure for main- taining the guarded files whilst not precluding alternate mechanisms in the future. 6. References [1] Bates, T., Jouanigot, J-M., Karrenberg, D., Lothberg, P., Terpstra, M., "Representation of IP Routing Policies in the RIPE Database", RIPE-81, February 1993. [2] Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., "Description of Inter-AS Networks in the RIPE Routing Registry", RIPE-103, December 1993. [3] Karrenberg, D., "RIPE Database Template for Networks", RIPE-50, April 1992. [4] J.-M. Jouanigot, "Policy based routing within RIPE", May 1992. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 7 - Appendix A - Format of Guardian Files. We propose to keep the file format as simple as possible. The name of the file is identical to the name of guarded object. The format used within the file is kept simple. It allows lines to be either comments or the actual object entry that is to be guarded. A comment must contain either a semi-colon (;) or hash (#) at the beginning of the comment line. The object name entries must be exactly the same as they are in the database. Currently, the only object containing guarded attributes is the "inetnum" object so the file can contain either the `well-known' dotted quad network notation or RIPE dotted quad range notation. Here is a simple example of what the AS1104 guarded file would look like. The file would be stored in the home directory of the AS1104 account on guardian.ripe.net and be called AS1104 (told you it was simple). It would contain something like the following: # # File : AS1104 # ; An alternate comment format ; ; This file was updated jan.dijkstra(a)gouda.nl ; on 940109 ; 192.16.183.0 192.16.185.0 - 192.16.186.0 192.16.194.0 192.16.199.0 192.87.45.0 Empty lines in the file are also ignored but you are encouraged to keep the file as concise as possible. As stated above, a tool known as `checkguard' will be available to make it simple to check the syntax of the guarded file. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 8 - Appendix B - Example of conflict handling If a conflict occurs (e.g. by listing the same network number in more han one AS guarded file), then each of the guardians involved will be notified on the conflict by electronic mail. Let's look at a simple example. Suppose the guardians for AS1104 and AS2122 update their relevant guardian files and create a conflict by having the same network in them. For this example he network in question is "192.16.183.0". Here is the AS1104 guardian file: # 192.16.183.0 192.16.185.0 192.16.186.0 192.16.194.0 192.16.199.0 192.87.45.0 And here is the AS2122 guardian file: # 192.16.183.0 193.0.0.0 - 193.0.7.0 As you can see "192.16.183.0 exists in both files. At update time the following mails are generated. Firstly, to the guardian of AS2122. Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:22:43 +0100 Message-Id: <9401141222.AA07125(a)ns.ripe.net> From: RIPE Database Conflict Handler <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net> Subject: Guarded attributes conflicts found To: as2122(a)ripe.net Dear Guardian, One or more conflicts have been found regarding guarded attributes in the RIPE database. Some of the conflicts concern the guarded values you are a guardian for. Please verify and correct the conflicts below. The guarded values for objects below have been set to the value they had in the database before this guarded attributes run. Kind Regards, RIPE Database Conflict Department ------ "192.16.183.0" also appears in guardian files: AS1104 And similarly to the AS1104 guardian. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994 - 9 - Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:22:42 +0100 Message-Id: <9401141222.AA07121(a)ns.ripe.net> From: RIPE Database Conflict Handler <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net> Subject: Guarded attributes conflicts found To: as1104(a)ripe.net Dear Guardian, One or more conflicts have been found regarding guarded attributes in the RIPE database. Some of the conflicts concern the guarded values you are a guardian for. Please verify and correct the conflicts below. The guarded values for objects below have been set to the value they had in the database before this guarded attributes run. Kind Regards, RIPE Database Conflict Department ------ "192.16.183.0" also appears in guardian files: AS2122 >From this you can see conflict can be quickly and easily resolved, assuming good collaboration between the guardians. The existing database entry will of course not be changed with regard to the guarded attribute) as long as there exists a conflict. ripe-1nn.txt February 3, 1994

1 0

Revised proposol CLNS domain object:
by Henk Steenman 02 Feb '94

02 Feb '94

Based on the outcome of some discussion during the presentation of the dom-prefix at the last RIPE database workgroup meeting I have added/changed the following. 1: Prefixes or NSAPs are to be formatted with dots. The first dot defines the AFI and comes after the first two digits. Every next four digits should be seperated by dots. 2: The cost associated with default routing should be interpreted such that the prefered path has the lowest cost. - Henk Steenman ----------------------------- Cut here ------------------------------------- CLNS routing-domain object for the RIPE database Version 1.3 Feb 1994 Henk Steenman Henk_Steenman(a)sara.nl +31 20 5928038 CLNS routing-domain object Page 2 Introduction. ____________ In the RARE lower layer technology work group for CLNS it was recognised that in order to coordinate routing between CLNS routing domains a central registry for such domains was necessary. At a meeting of the work group at the 27 IETF in Amsterdam it was decided to write a registry specification. At this meeting the RIPE NCC offered to extend their database for IP domains/networks with CLNS related objects if a sound proposal came forward. Below a description of a database object for CLNS routing domains is defined. The object can be used to describe some general information of a CLNS routing domain such as NSAP prefix, name, description and responsible persons. It can also be used to describe routing policies in a manner comparable to that for IP domains ( AS's ) as defined in the paper RIPE 81 [1]. The attributes describing routing policy are intended to be set-up such that routing tables for static inter-domain routing can be derived from them or excisting routing can be checked against the described policy. It is desired that tools are made to serve these tasks. It is understood that the object as described below is subject to change when CLNS routing developes. An example of this could be the future availability of IDRP for dynamic inter-domain routing. In an appendix, some generally used combinations of the Authority and Format Identifier (AFI) and the Initial Domain Identifier (IDI) are shown. The RIPE database expects NSAPs or prefixes to be formatted with dots, seperating the first two and then every next four digits. CLNS routing-domain object Page 3 Object Description _________________ dom-prefix: Defines an unique routing domain, characterised by a NSAP prefix , within a certain prefix hierarchy. Example: dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100 dom-name: String representing the routing domain. Format: Text string. Example: dom-name: SURFnet-CLNS descr: Description of the organisation and place of its location Format is equal to the descr attribute as defined for IP autonomous systems in [1]. bis: Format : < bis NET > < dom-prefix > NET of boundary intermediate system to between two domains Example: SURFnet BIS for EuropaNet bis: 39.528f.1100.1000.2000.0000.0001.0000.0c04.29b4.00 39.528f.1103 CLNS routing-domain object Page 4 dom-in: Description of accepted routing domain prefixes, from other domain BIS. Analogue to "as-in" in [1]. Format:< dom-prefix > < cost> <routing policy expression > For every BIS you peer with, there should be such an entry <dom-prefix> is the routing domain prefix where the BIS you peer with belongs to. <cost> is a relative cost to discriminate between different routes to the same domain. The lowest cost gives the most preferred route. <routing policy expression > can be expressed in the following way's 1: list of "dom-prefixes" Example: dom-in: 39.528f.1103 100 39.124F 47.0005 2: KEYWORD Only one keyword for the moment ANY - accept everything you get announced. 3: A logical expression of 1 and/or 2. The following operators should be defined AND OR NOT Parenthesis are used to group rules. Example: dom-in: 39.528f.1103 ANY AND NOT 39.756f Accept all announcements from EMPB BIS except for the Switzerland routing domain. CLNS routing-domain object Page 5 dom-out: Routing domain prefixes announced to other BIS'. Analogue to the "as-out' tag in [1]. Format : < dom-prefix > <routing policy expression > <dom-prefix> is the routing domain prefix where the BIS you peer with belongs to. <routing policy expression > As defined with the dom-in tag. Example: dom-out: 39.528f.1103 39.528f.1100 AND NOT 39.528f.1100.0009.10 Advertise to Europanet the SURFnet-CLNS routing domain but not the PTT-Research routing domain. default: Indication how default routing is done default: < dom-prefix> <cost> <dom-prefix> again is the prefix of the domain where the BIS peer is in. <cost> indicates which default path is preferred. The lower cost gives the preffered path Example: default: 39.528f.1103 10 Default everything is routed to 39.528f.1103 CLNS routing-domain object Page 6 admin-c: Administrative contact. Format equal to admin-c in [1]. tech-c: Technical contact Format equal to tech-c in [1]. guardian: e-mail and/or postal address of domain guardian. Analogue to AS guardian in [1]. source: Source of the information. Equal to source field in [1]. remark: remarks or comments Equal to remark field in [1] changed: Who and when of last change. Equal to change field in [1]. CLNS routing-domain object Page 7 Example: _________ dom-prefix: 39.528f.1100 descr: SURFnet-CLNS domain. bis: 39.528f.1100.1000.2000.0000.0001.0000.0c04.29b4.00 39.528f.1103 dom-in: 39.528f.1103 100 ANY AND NOT 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-in: 39.528f.1100.0009.10 100 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-out: 39.528f.1103 39.528f.1100 AND NOT 39.528f.1100.0009.10 dom-out: 39.528f.1100.0009.10 39.528f.1100 default: 39.528f.1103 10 admin-c: Victor Reijs tech-c: Henk Steenman guardian: domain-guardian(a)surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: henk(a)sara.nl 930716 SURFnet accepts from EMPB ( 39528f1103 ) all prefixes but one, 39.528f.1100.0009.10, which is PTT-research that is connected to both EMPB and SURFnet. From PTT-research SURFnet only accepts the PTT-research prefix. SURFnet announces to EMPB, 39.528f.1100 but not 39.528f.1100.0009.10. To PTT-research only 39.528f.1100 is announced. Translated to static routing; on the SURFnet BIS connected to PTT- research, there is a static route to 39.528f.1100.0009.10. And on the SURFnet BIS connected to EMPB there is a static route to all other know prefixes. On both the PTT-reserach and EMPB BIS's connected to SURFnet there is a static route to 39.528f.1100. CLNS routing-domain object Page 8 Appendix A. ___________ Definition of NSAP structure is defined in OSI 8348 Ad2 [2]. In general: NSAP's are always an integer number of octets where the AFI is always one octet and the IDI is always an integer number of octets. NSAP's are hierarchical structured and once the AFI is decided upon, structuring of the rest of the NSAP is up to authorities down the tree. Two common AFI are 47 and 39 and can be described by some general rules. AFI: 39 Describes that the following two octets are the ISO DCC country codes. Since these codes are always described by three digits, padding with an "f" is necessary to complete the 2 octets. Further structure is done by the authority for each country and there is no general rule. AFI: 47 IDI: 4 defines OSINET. Followed by a two byte organisation identifier. IDI: 5 defines US-GOSIP Version 1 defines a two byte organisation identifier. Version 2 defines a one byte data format identifier, a two byte zero field a three byte administrative authority a two byte routing domain id. CLNS routing-domain object Page 9 References __________ [1] : RIPE-81, Representation of IP routing Policies in the RIPE database, Tony Bates, Jean-Michel Jouanigot, Daniel Karrenberg, Peter Lothberg and Marten Terpstra, Feb. 1993 [2] : OSI 8348 Ad2 Network Services Definition, Addendum 2, covering Network Layer Addressing. --------

1 0

Draft minutes 17th RIPE meeting: DB-WG
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 02 Feb '94

02 Feb '94

Dear all, this is the draft minutes of the Database-WG meeting(s) at the 17th RIPE meeting. Any input and comments welcome, especially from those being affected by these things in one way or the other :-). Best regards, Wilfried. -------------------- start of draft minutes -------------------- 17th RIPE Meeting: Draft minutes for the DB-Working-Group meeting 25.1.1993, Amsterdam. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Due to the scheduling (and the un-avoidable overlap) of some WG meetings, the items on the agenda were treated in a different order than originally proposed. However the minutes follow the original ordering. 0. Opening, Scribe, Admin The DB-WG meeting was opened and Ruediger Volk volunteered to take notes. As a direct result of the preceding meeting of the Routing-WG and following other discussions the proposed agenda was amended (DB statistics for Domain-Object, maintainance of e-mail attribute and .forward files for guarded objects, timing considerations for guarded objects and values, aspects of ownership of objects and deletions and inter-dependancies). 1. New Databse software 1.1 . current status Marten Terpstra gave a concise report on the current state of the "new" database software. Due to timing constraints (and the lack of documentation) there is still no official distribution of the "New DB Software". However it has already been successfully installed at a couple of sites. The slides for the presentation can be found in ftp.ripe.net:ripe/presentations/ripe-m17-marten-DB.ps.Z 1.2 . experiences No operational problems were mentioned. Operation of the software, including the organizational environment, is going very smooth and was generally appreciated. 1.3 . documentation (who, how, when, what) Documentation is still missing. A new effort is needed and will be made early February. It has to be taken into account, that Marten Terpstra will primarily work on the PRIDE project, reducing his involvement with the DB software. Action (Wilfried Woeber, NCC): produce the necessary documentation for the new DB software. 2. RIPE-Handles RIPE-Handles are urgently needed to make progress in the area of Database Exchange. Several possible methods of assigning these handles were discussed. the group reached consensus that the RIPE-Handles will be of the form RIPE-XYZ9999. It was decided that from the DB's point of view, there exists only ONE handle: the RIPE-Handle. Thus this handle is stored in the person object in the "nic-hdl:" attribute. For the initial population/conversion of the current entries, the value of the NIC-Handle will be taken and converted to a RIPE-Handle by appending the string "-RIPE". E.g. the NIC-Handle for Wilfried Woeber (WW144) will be converted to form the RIPE-Handle (WW144-RIPE). This conversion will be done only once for the inital population. There will then be a short period, when missing handles can be provided by means of "vanity-handles". After a to-be-announced flag-day, RIPE-Handles will be required for any operation on person objects in the Database. Any vanity handles used MUST be properly registered with the NCC! The same syntax has already been adopted by the JPNIC and the AUNIC. *** Please note that during the discussion (by accident) we all were talking about a prefix format *** The NCC was mandated to circulate an updated proposal, including operational aspects, and after a short review-process (e-mail), go ahead with the implementation. Action (NCC): update and re-circulate the RIPE-Handle proposal and then go ahead with the implementation. 3. PRIDE - DB Interaction Editorial comment: RIPE-81++ was treated in the Routing-WG. Currently there is no real pending issue with regard to the interaction between the PRIDE project and the RIPE-DB. After discussing possible future modifications or additions to DB objects, the NCC was mandated to go ahead and implement changes/additions to support the PRIDE project (like the hidden flags/options), unless there is a direct influence on operational aspects or changes to the user interface to the RIPE-DB. 4. Future needs 4.2 . Delete Operation vs Guarded Field interaction Various aspects of implementation of guarded objects were reviewed. With regard to possible "delete:" operation on network objects that are tagged with a guarded AS-value, consensus was to automatically notify the guardian of the AS-value. Changes to such objects do NOT generate a notification message. This functionality can be achieved by using the "notify:" attribute. The "notify:" attribute for an object is evaluated before the update is made. The technical issues of RIPE-81 was treated in the Routing-WG. Generally the transaction of deleting an object must be described. The document with the proposal for implementing guarded attributes is to be updated and recirculated for comment (e-mail, 14 days comment period). Then the NCC goes ahead with the implementation as soon as possible. Action (NCC): update and re-circulate the Guarded Fields proposal and then go ahead with the implementation. 4.3 . Phase-out of RIPE-60 stuff Jean-Michel Jouanigot continues to coordinate the migration to the RIPE-81 functionality. Any technical issues treated in the Routing-WG. 4.4 . Tools A proposal to have a certain kind of "template-mode" for checking and/or updating database objects was discussed. Several possible ways of implementing this were discussed (like a special flag for the whois-client, an interactive method at the NCC, providing a full template for further processing). Any solution proposed should be usable on most platforms. Action (NCC): investigate and propose facilities for a "template-mode" to support the maintaining database objects. 4.5 . Syntax checkers (distributed, and/or @ the NCC) The need for syntax-checking facilites for objects was again stated. The NCC was asked to look into providing this functionality and come up with a proposal. Action (NCC): Investigate and propose a syntax-checking facility for the new database software. 5. New/Revised Objects 5.1 . CLNS Routing "dom-prefix:" Henk Steenman provided an introduction to the current version of the proposal to have a database object for CLNS Routing. The only technical amendment discussed was to present the CLNP addresses in the format of xx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx (no trailing dots). The NCC may have to review the current shell of scripts supporting the database operations for limitations in line-length. The NCC was mandated to go ahead with implementing this object after another short round of review (e-mail) of Henk's updated specification. Action (Henk Steenman): update and re-circulate the "dom-prefix:" proposal. Action (NCC): implement the CLNS Routing Object. >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm going to ask Henk to provide the (updated) proposal for the presentations directory!? 5.2 . status of "connect:" and value "LOCAL" Decision about the future of the "connect:" attribute for a Network Object was postponed after full deployment of the RIPE-81 stuff. It is expected that the "connect:" will be phased out and be replaced by a different mechanism (community?). The "connect:" attribute is no longer mandatory. 5.3 . Domain Object The status of the Domain Object was reviewed, prompted by the fact of poor coverage in the database. Again the object was felt to be useful, although currently there is little operational influence of registering (or NOT registering) domains in the database. Consensus was to ask the DNS-WG to review and maybe update the definition of the Domain Object. Action (Francis Dupont): Have the DNS group review the Domain Object and come up with either a recommendation for retirement or with an updated functionality 5.4 . others The "notify:" attribute is already implemented and is already used by the database software. The "maintainer:" attribute is already implemented but currently not used by the databse software. 6. Exchange Format 6.1 . current status No progress has been made due to the lack of RIPE-Handles. Can be progressed after implementation of RIPE-Handles. 6.2 . recommendations for further action As an aside - the group propsed to NOT enforce uniqueness of network names. 7. DB statistics (Domain-Object) Having stistics about the DB coverage of domains was seen to be potentially useful. Postponed to wait for the Domain Object review by the DNS-WG. 8. Maint. of e-mail: and .forward for guarded objects After evaluating possible szenarios it was decided that an automatic modification of either the "e-mail:" attribute of a guarded object or the .forward file for the guardian's account is not desirable. Responsibility of the maintainance remains with the guardians. 9. Timing considerations for guarded objects, values, secondary DBs Some operational issues of implementing guarded fileds were reviewed. Aspects discussed in more detail were: - timing and interlock: Some mechanism must be set up by the NCC to allow for checking the merge/update status of the current version of the database. This should allow for an automatic delay of retrieving the DB for local use and/or providing read-only copies. The NCC will come up with a technical proposal how to do this. - change control: in order to preserve the update history for databse objects a structured scheme was proposed. This method preserves the "changed:" attributes supplied by any manual update process. In addition to that any automatic up-date and/or merge operation done by the database software maintains a single related "changed:" attribute describing the "agent" performing the modification. From a formal point of view, regular maintainance and/or merge operations are NOT treated as update operations, thus e.g. they do not trigger (automatic) notification messages. Action (NCC): Propose and implement a mechanism to check the current state of the database with regard to garbage-collection and merging of guarding values. Action (NCC): Propose and implement a mechanism to properly keep track of individual updates of objects and automatic merge/modification operations. 10. Deletions, Ownership of Objects, Interdependency This was a more general discussion, focussing on issues of "ownership" of objects, inter-dependency of various components and quality of the information in the database. >From a formal point of view, there was agreement that we should stick with the concept that the responsibility for maintaining objects remains with the owner of the object. From an operational point of view it was felt necessary to perform automatic modifications to certain attributes of an objects. In the long run this could eventually lead to splitting objects along the lines of maintainance. This is for further discussion. Concern was voiced that we do not have the concept of winding down the use of methods, removing out-dated information and/or deleting objects, closing guardian's accounts, etc. It was felt that there is a need to analyze, discuss and document these issues. For the time being these aspects have to be covered in individual documents describing certain procedures, in the long run this should be an intrinsic part of the documentation. The aspect of "sanity checking" the information in the databse was shortly touched. Given the current shortage of manpower in the NCC and the important changes to be implemented in the near future this issue was postponed. Z. AOB None. -------------------- end of draft minutes --------------------

1 0

Draft Guarded Field document
by Tony Bates 24 Jan '94

24 Jan '94

Please find enclosed a DRAFT copy of a document describing the Guarded Field procedure. This gives details of both the process for updating guardian files as well as how conflicts are handled. The current status is that the software is in final beta test and all the auto-generated "AS" accounts/files have been generated (see doc for more details). Our plan is to turn the "guarded field" software on in the database on February 7th. There will be a short introduction for both the paper and implementation given in the routing working group session at next weeks RIPE meeting. All comments welcome. We plan to agree and close this document at the RIPE meeting. See you next week. --Tony. Support of Guarded fields within the RIPE Database * DRAFT * Tony Bates Document-ID: ripe-1nn 1. Introduction The RIPE database contains several significant attributes which make it well suited for use as part of operational procedures and confi- guration. Most significantly are the attributes which make up the RIPE Routing Registry (RR) as specified in RIPE-81 [1][2], namely the "aut-sys" and "comm-list" attributes. For these attributes to be of use to service providers they must be: o Properly authorised. o Efficient for both maintainers of the attributes and the main- tainers of the whole database. This document describes an overview of the RIPE database attributes which are guarded, the procedure for updating these guarded attri- butes and the general use of "guarded" fields within the RIPE data- base. 2. The Database Guarded Attributes All the guarded attributes currently supported in the RIPE database are contained within the "inetnum" or network object. However, the association corresponds to their relevant guarded database objects. If we look at a simple example this becomes clear: inetnum: 192.87.45.0 netname: RIPE-NCC descr: RIPE Network Coordination Centre descr: Amsterdam, Netherlands country: NL admin-c: Daniel Karrenberg tech-c: Marten Terpstra connect: RIPE NSF WCW aut-sys: AS1104 ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 2 - comm-list: SURFNET ias-int: 192.87.45.80 AS1104 ias-int: 192.87.45.6 AS2122 ias-int: 192.87.45.254 AS2600 rev-srv: ns.ripe.net rev-srv: ns.eu.net notify: ops(a)ripe.net changed: tony(a)ripe.net 940110 source: RIPE This shows that the RIPE-NCC network belongs to autonomous system 1104 and is in a community known as SURFNET. This is valuable infor- mation that could easily be used for example for routing policy pur- poses (as well as other operational uses). Currently support for the following set of guarded attributes is implemented: aut-sys The "aut-sys" attribute has a direct mapping to "aut-num" objects as defined in RIPE-81. That is the Autonomous System (AS) that the network number is a part of. As defined in RIPE- 81, a network can only belong to one AS and hence the "aut-sys" attribute can only contain one AS number. The syntax of the "aut-sys" attribute is: AS<positive integer between 1 and 65535> (1). i.e. AS1104 comm-list The "comm-list" attribute has a direct mapping to "community" objects as defined in RIPE-81. A network can belong to more than one community. The syntax of "comm-list" is: Multiple text strings which cannot start with "AS" or any of the <routing policy expression> KEYWORDS defined in RIPE-81. routpr-l (2) The "routpr-l" attribute has a direct mapping to "rout-pr" objects as defined in RIPE-60 [4]. Networks can belong to more than one routing privilege. The list of networks within a rout- ing privilege represents the group of networks accepted/allowed by a set of routers described by the information in the "rout- pr" object. The syntax for "routpr-l" is as follows: Multiple text strings representing the routing privilege. _________________________ (1) This represents a change from RIPE-50 [3] where the "aut-sys" attribute was defined to be a positive integer only, not containing the string "AS" at the start. This change has been made to be consistent with the "aut-num" object syntax. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 3 - bdrygw-l The "bdrygw-l" attribute has a direct mapping to "bdry-gw" objects as defined in RIPE-60 [4]. Networks can belong to more than one boundary gateway. The list of networks within a boun- dary gateway represents the group of networks advertised by a set of routers described by the information in the "bdry-gw" object. The syntax for "bdrygw-l" is as follows: Multiple text strings representing the boundary gateways iden- tification. As these attributes are tightly coupled to their associated objects it makes sense for these attributes to be updated not by the network maintainer but by the maintainer of the referenced object(s). The basic premise behind this is that these attributes should be used for various operational procedures such as setting routing policy, accounting and so on. For these attributes to be used by network operators for day to day operations they need to be guarded in such a way that can be trusted and are guaranteed to be unique - with any conflicts quickly and easily resolved. The procedure for achieving this is detailed below. 3. The Basic Procedure For each of the guarded attributes detailed above, a list of all networks having this attribute is kept separately from the general database itself. These lists (also called `guarded files') will be maintained and be served as the `only' source of membership informa- tion used in the database. Normal database updates `never' change these attributes. If an update includes such an attribute and a discrepancy between the values in the update and those in the data- base is found, a diagnostic message will be sent to the originator of the update and the guarded value(s) will not be affected. The attributes as defined in these files are incorporated in the data- base once a day. To ensure proper control and authorisation, these lists will be maintained at the RIPE NCC on the same machine that contains the RIPE database. The "guardians" of the corresponding database objects will have to maintain their own guarded files. The guardians are provided with individually assigned login accounts at the RIPE NCC. The guardians can themselves decide in what manner they want to update their file. The NCC will offer interactive logins, ftp logins or any other means that might be deemed useful. _________________________ (2) It should be noted that both "routpr-l" and "bdrygw-l" attributes have been agreed to be phased out in preference of the "aut-sys" and "comm-list" attri- butes as soon as the `guarded field' mechanism is in place. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 4 - 3.1. Some Details As stated each guardian will be issued with an account on the cen- tral NCC machine known as `guardian.ripe.net'. This account will contain a `restricted' environment which will allow the guardian of the relevant object to update their associated guardian file (3). Wherever possible the account name issued to the guardian will be the same as the object name. For example, the guardian of the AS1104 aut-num object will receive an account known as "AS1104". With each guardian account the corresponding file will be parsed at each update run (once a day). This file will contain the list on networks associated with the object. See appendix A for details of the format and syntax of the guardian files. A tool will also be provided within the restricted environment to syntax check the guarded file to avoid against possible typos and errors. With each account, an electronic mail address (this is a mandatory attribute for all guarded objects) will be used by the NCC and data- base software. To make this flexible for the guardian a ".forward" file with the account which can be change when required. This will mean mail sent to <guardian-name(a)guardian.ripe.net> will go the to correct guardian. 3.2. How does it work ? For each of the guarded files found on `guardian.ripe.net' the data- base software will load any guarded attribute value(s) for the net- work object(s) listed in the guarded file. This will take place at the same time as the database is garbage collected (currently at 0500 MET). If a conflict is found (i.e if more than one entry exists for an attribute which can only contain one entry, currently only "aut-sys" contains this property), the current value will remain unchanged and all guardians involved in the conflict will be sent an electronic mail message informing them of the conflict. See Appendix B for an example. If no conflict is found the attribute will be updated with the guarded value. Correspondingly, to remove a guarded attribute just remove the net- work entry from the relevant guarded file and it will be deleted at the next update run. To be notified of this delete the "notify" attribute should be used. _________________________ (3) As stated, the mechanism for updating the guardi- an file will initially be by interactive login or file transfer. However, this doesn't preclude other mechan- isms in the future. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 5 - If a guardian file contains an entry which is not in the database then the guardian will be notified as part of the conflict handling procedure. If an update is sent to the database software using another mechan- ism (i.e. mail to auto-dbm(a)ripe.net) that contains a guarded attri- bute, this will not be allowed to change the guarded attribute. If the value of the attribute is the same as what is currently registered in the database then no warnings will be given. However, if the update contains a value for a guarded attribute that is dif- ferent to that registered in the database, a warning will be sent to the originator and the guarded value will remain unchanged. Although the guarded process will run once a day as part of the database garbage collection procedure it will also be possible to, "on request to the NCC", run an emergency guarded update process for a particular guarded object. 4. Getting it started As this is a new (and much needed, especially for the "aut-sys" attribute) mechanism, a degree of `bootstrapping' is needed to make it easier for network providers and IRs to transition to using the guarded file procedure. The NCC has built an automated generation scheme for attributes that are known to be in use (currently, this means AS numbers). For all the AS numbers seen to be routed in Europe, accounts for the guardians have already been put in place having the guardian's mailbox point to a mailbox at the RIPE NCC. For these ASs currently guarded files are generated on a daily basis by analyzing European full routing tables. This means there could (and almost certainly will) be some conflicts within the generated guardian files. As soon as the account is handed over, the auto-generation for that guardian account stops and the mailbox is changed to the correct guardian mailbox. Guardians can of course make use of the auto- generated guarded files if they wish to check against their own records. From the moment of `hand-over' it is now the guardians responsibility to make sure their associated network(s) get the correct guarded attributes by listing them in the guarded files. The advantage of having this `bootstrap' method is that it will allow population of the guarded "aut-sys" attribute to take place immediately this functionality is enabled in the RIPE database software. It also acts as an incentive for networks operators and local IR's to transition to the guarded file procedure as soon as possible. 5. Conclusion The update procedure as detailed above has the following advantages: o Authorisation of adding/deleting is guaranteed. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 6 - o No need for mailing back and forth of authorisation messages. o Simple procedure for both database maintainers and guardians. o Guardians keep full control of their attribute. It allows for the addition of any number of guarded attributes in the future. It describes a simple but effective procedure for main- taining the guarded files whilst not precluding alternate mechanisms in the future. 6. References [1] Bates, T., Jouanigot, J-M., Karrenberg, D., Lothberg, P., Terpstra, M., "Representation of IP Routing Policies in the RIPE Database", RIPE-81, February 1993. [2] Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., "Description of Inter-AS Networks in the RIPE Routing Registry", RIPE-103, December 1993. [3] Karrenberg, D., "RIPE Database Template for Networks", RIPE-50, April 1992. [4] J.-M. Jouanigot, "Policy based routing within RIPE", May 1992. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 7 - Appendix A - Format of Guardian Files. We propose to keep the file format as simple as possible. The name of the file is identical to the name of guarded object. The format used within the file is kept simple. It allows lines to be either comments or the actual object entry that is to be guarded. A comment must contain either a semi-colon (;) or hash (#) at the beginning of the comment line. The object name entries must be exactly the same as they are in the database. Currently, the only object containing guarded attributes is the "inetnum" object so the file can contain either the `well-known' dotted quad network notation or RIPE dotted quad range notation. Here is a simple example of what the AS1104 guarded file would look like. The file would be stored in the home directory of the AS1104 account on guardian.ripe.net and be called AS1104 (told you it was simple). It would contain something like the following: # # File : AS1104 # ; An alternate comment format ; ; This file was updated jan.dijkstra(a)gouda.nl ; on 940109 ; 192.16.183.0 192.16.185.0 - 192.16.186.0 192.16.194.0 192.16.199.0 192.87.45.0 Empty lines in the file are also ignored but you are encouraged to keep the file as concise as possible. As stated above, a tool known as `checkguard' will be available to make it simple to check the syntax of the guarded file. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 8 - Appendix B - Example of conflict handling If a conflict occurs (e.g. by listing the same network number in more han one AS guarded file), then each of the guardians involved will be notified on the conflict by electronic mail. Let's look at a simple example. Suppose the guardians for AS1104 and AS2122 update their relevant guardian files and create a conflict by having the same network in them. For this example he network in question is "192.16.183.0". Here is the AS1104 guardian file: # 192.16.183.0 192.16.185.0 192.16.186.0 192.16.194.0 192.16.199.0 192.87.45.0 And here is the AS2122 guardian file: # 192.16.183.0 193.0.0.0 - 193.0.7.0 As you can see "192.16.183.0 exists in both files. At update time the following mails are generated. Firstly, to the guardian of AS2122. Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:22:43 +0100 Message-Id: <9401141222.AA07125(a)ns.ripe.net> From: RIPE Database Conflict Handler <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net> Subject: Guarded attributes conflicts found To: as2122(a)ripe.net Dear Guardian, One or more conflicts have been found regarding guarded attributes in the RIPE database. Some of the conflicts concern the guarded values you are a guardian for. Please verify and correct the conflicts below. The guarded values for objects below have been set to the value they had in the database before this guarded attributes run. Kind Regards, RIPE Database Conflict Department ------ "192.16.183.0" also appears in guardian files: AS1104 And similarly to the AS1104 guardian. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994 - 9 - Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:22:42 +0100 Message-Id: <9401141222.AA07121(a)ns.ripe.net> From: RIPE Database Conflict Handler <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net> Subject: Guarded attributes conflicts found To: as1104(a)ripe.net Dear Guardian, One or more conflicts have been found regarding guarded attributes in the RIPE database. Some of the conflicts concern the guarded values you are a guardian for. Please verify and correct the conflicts below. The guarded values for objects below have been set to the value they had in the database before this guarded attributes run. Kind Regards, RIPE Database Conflict Department ------ "192.16.183.0" also appears in guardian files: AS2122 >From this you can see conflict can be quickly and easily resolved, assuming good collaboration between the guardians. The existing database entry will of course not be changed with regard to the guarded attribute) as long as there exists a conflict. ripe-1nn.txt January 19, 1994

3 4

Proposal for a CLNS routing domain object for the RIPE database.
by Henk Steenman 21 Jan '94

21 Jan '94

Here is the proposal for the CLNS routing domain object for the RIPE datase as will be presented next tuesday during the DB workgroup meeting. This version is almost similar as the one presented at a previous RIPE meeting. The main differences are a new attribute "dom-name", an introduction describing shortly why such an object is desired and an appendix that gives a very short comment on the breakdown of NSAP's for some commonly used AFI's. - Henk Steenman SARA, NIC --------------------- CUT HERE --------------------------------------------- CLNS routing-domain object for the RIPE database Version 1.2 Jan 1994 Henk Steenman Henk_Steenman(a)sara.nl +31 20 5928038 CLNS routing-domain object Page 2 Introduction. ____________ In the RARE lower layer technology work group for CLNS it was recognised that in order to coordinate routing between CLNS routing domains a central registry for such domains was necessary. At a meeting of the work group at the 27 IETF in Amsterdam it was decided to write a registry specification. At this meeting the RIPE NCC offered to extend their database for IP domains/networks with CLNS related objects if a sound proposal came forward. Below a description of a database object for CLNS routing domains is defined. The object can be used to describe some general information of a CLNS routing domain such as NSAP prefix, name, description and responsible persons. It can also be used to describe routing policies in a manner comparable to that for IP domains ( AS's ) as defined in the paper RIPE 81 [1]. The attributes describing routing policy are intended to be set-up such that routing tables for static inter-domain routing can be derived from them or excisting routing can be checked against the described policy. It is desired that tools are made to serve these tasks. It is understood that the object as described below is subject to change when CLNS routing developes. An example of this could be the future availability of IDRP for dynamic inter-domain routing. In an appendix, some generally used combinations of the Authority and Format Identifier (AFI) and the Initial Domain Identifier (IDI) are shown. CLNS routing-domain object Page 3 Object Description _________________ dom-prefix: Defines an unique routing domain, characterised by a NSAP prefix , within a certain prefix hierarchy. Example: dom-prefix: 39528f1100 dom-name: String representing the routing domain. Format: Text string. Example: dom-name: SURFnet-CLNS descr: Description of the organisation and place of its location Format is equal to the descr attribute as defined for IP autonomous systems in [1]. bis: Format : < bis NET > < dom-prefix > NET of boundary intermediate system to between two domains Example: SURFnet BIS for EuropaNet bis: 39528f1100100020000000000100000c0429b400 39528f1103 CLNS routing-domain object Page 4 dom-in: Description of accepted routing domain prefixes, from other domain BIS. Analogue to "as-in" in [1]. Format:< dom-prefix > < cost> <routing policy expression > For every BIS you peer with, there should be such an entry <dom-prefix> is the routing domain prefix where the BIS you peer with belongs to. <cost> is a relative cost to discriminate between different routes to the same domain. The lowest cost gives the most preferred route. <routing policy expression > can be expressed in the following way's 1: list of "dom-prefixes" Example: dom-in: 39528f1103 100 39124F 470005 2: KEYWORD Only one keyword for the moment ANY - accept everything you get announced. 3: A logical expression of 1 and/or 2. The following operators should be defined AND OR NOT Parenthesis are used to group rules. Example: dom-in: 39528f1103 ANY AND NOT 39756f Accept all announcements from EMPB BIS except for the Switzerland routing domain. CLNS routing-domain object Page 5 dom-out: Routing domain prefixes announced to other BIS'. Analogue to the "as-out' tag in [1]. Format : < dom-prefix > <routing policy expression > <dom-prefix> is the routing domain prefix where the BIS you peer with belongs to. <routing policy expression > As defined with the dom-in tag. Example: dom-out: 39528f1103 39528f1100 AND NOT 39528f1100000910 Advertise to Europanet the SURFnet-CLNS routing domain but not the PTT-Research routing domain. default: Indication how default routing is done default: < dom-prefix> <cost> <dom-prefix> again is the prefix of the domain where the BIS peer is in. <cost> indicates which default path is preferred. In a static routing environment this doesn't make sense. Example: default: 39528f1103 10 Default everything is routed to 39528f1103 CLNS routing-domain object Page 6 admin-c: Administrative contact. Format equal to admin-c in [1]. tech-c: Technical contact Format equal to tech-c in [1]. guardian: e-mail and/or postal address of domain guardian. Analogue to AS guardian in [1]. source: Source of the information. Equal to source field in [1]. remark: remarks or comments Equal to remark field in [1] changed: Who and when of last change. Equal to change field in [1]. CLNS routing-domain object Page 7 Example: _________ dom-prefix: 39528f1100 descr: SURFnet-CLNS domain. bis: 39528f1100100020000000000100000c0429b400 39528f1103 dom-in: 39528f1103 100 ANY AND NOT 39528f1100000910 dom-in: 39528f1100000910 100 39528f1100000910 dom-out: 39528f1103 39528f1100 AND NOT 39528f1100000910 dom-out: 39528f1100000910 39528f1100 default: 39528f1103 10 admin-c: Victor Reijs tech-c: Henk Steenman guardian: domain-guardian(a)surfnet.nl source: RIPE changed: henk(a)sara.nl 930716 SURFnet accepts from EMPB ( 39528f1103 ) all prefixes but one, 39528f1100000910, which is PTT-research that is connected to both EMPB and SURFnet. From PTT-research SURFnet only accepts the PTT-research prefix. SURFnet announces to EMPB, 39528f1100 but not 39528f1100000910. To PTT-research only 39528f1100 is announced. Translated to static routing; on the SURFnet BIS connected to PTT- research, there is a static route to 39528f1100000910. And on the SURFnet BIS connected to EMPB there is a static route to all other know prefixes. On both the PTT-reserach and EMPB BIS's connected to SURFnet there is a static route to 39528f1100. ^L ^L CLNS routing-domain object Page 8 Appendix A. ___________ Definition of NSAP structure is defined in OSI 8348 Ad2 [2]. In general: NSAP's are always an integer number of octets where the AFI is always one octet and the IDI is always an integer number of octets. NSAP's are hierarchical structured and once the AFI is decided upon, structuring of the rest of the NSAP is up to authorities down the tree. Two common AFI are 47 and 39 and can be described by some general rules. AFI: 39 Describes that the following two octets are the ISO DCC country codes. Since these codes are always described by three digits, padding with an "f" is necessary to complete the 2 octets. Further structure is done by the authority for each country and there is no general rule. AFI: 47 IDI: 4 defines OSINET. Followed by a two byte organisation identifier. IDI: 5 defines US-GOSIP Version 1 defines a two byte organisation identifier. Version 2 defines a one byte data format identifier, a two byte zero field a three byte administrative authority a two byte routing domain id. ^L ^L CLNS routing-domain object Page 9 References __________ [1] : RIPE-81, Representation of IP routing Policies in the RIPE database, Tony Bates, Jean-Michel Jouanigot, Daniel Karrenberg, Peter Lothberg and Marten Terpstra, Feb. 1993 [2] : Network Services Definition, Addendum 2, covering Network Layer Addressing.

1 0

Draft Agenda DB-WG for RIPE #17, Amsterdam
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 19 Jan '94

19 Jan '94

Dear all, this is the first draft of the agenda for the up-coming meeting of the RIPE DB-WG in Amsterdam. Comments, additions, modification requests welcome! See you in Amsterdam, Wilfried. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ripe-17.940119-a Draft agenda for the DB-Working-Group at RIPE-17, Amsterdam. ------------------------------------------------------------ 0. Opening, Scribe, Admin 1. New Databse Software . current status . experiences . documentation (who, how, when, what) - object definition and background - software documentation - maintainer's guide for Local-IRs - secondary server's guide 2. RIPE-Handles 3. PRIDE - RIPE-DB Interaction (if any) 4. Future needs . Guardians, operational aspects . Delete Operation vs Guarded Filed interaction (unless treated in the Presentation in the Routing Group) . Phase-out of RIPE-60 stuff (unless treated in the Presentation in the Routing Group) . Tools . Syntax checkers (distributed, and/or @ the NCC) 5. New/Revised Objects . CLNS Routing "dom-prefix:" . status of "connect:" and value "LOCAL" . status of "notify:" . others 6. Exchange Format . current status . recommendations for further action Z. AOB ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : Wilfried.Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at (Internet) Computer Center - ACOnet : Z00WWR01(a)AWIUNI11.BITNET (EARN) Vienna University : 29133::WOEBER (SPAN/HEPnet) Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Tel: +43 1 4065822 355 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : Fax: +43 1 4065822 170 NIC: WW144 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Latest on the dbase software
by Marten Terpstra 13 Jan '94

13 Jan '94

Folks, here is an update of what has happened with the database software over the last few months: - options have been added to whoisd (some you may have already seen): -r do NOT lookup referenced objects -F do fast lookup, in short format, without reformatting (implies -r) -V faciltates version numbers to be logged in queries this is used to identify prtraceroute and prcheck queries. For instance, prtraceroute is logged with -Vpt0.32 at the moment, where "pt" stands for prtraceroute and 0.32 is the version of prtraceroute used. This option is internal to special tools that use the database, and should NOT be used on command line. -k keepalive. This option will keep the connection between client and server open after a query. Also this option is ONLY used in tools that need a number of queries fast after one another (like prtraceroute) All the options (except the -V and -k) are available in the latest ripe whois client: ftp.ripe.net:tools/ripe-whois.tar.Z Please note that these options will NOT work with other whois servers, and only work with the latest beta whoisd. - the "notify" attribute as defined in ripe-096 has been implemented. The database has accepted "notify" and "maintainer" already for some months, but now the functionality of "notify" has been added last week. The functionality of "maintainer" is not implemented yet. You are welcome to use "notify" but please do not go mad on it. - the guarded stuff has (finally) been implemented, and is currently under heavy test at the NCC. It includes all the things needed to implement ripe-81 guarded attributes, including conflict handling and all other things needed. A document describing the procedures is being written (at this moment actually) and will be ready soon. - many many many small and big bugs have been reported and fixed. Most modules of the software have had some 5-10 fixes each, and the main programs like whoisd have had some 20 fixes. Many of these bugs were nasty little programming errors that appear in only some circumstances, and were thus hard to find. Also, many things have changed to speed things up a bit more. - the software is unfortunately still beta, simply because there are too many changes made every day. Once the guarded attributes have been debugged and the documentation written ;-( it will be an official release. - Some stats, taken out of the quarterly report December 93 (which will be published this week): (All stats over Oct, Nov and Dec 1993) queries: 177,423 e-mail messages with updates processed: 3,575 number of objects processed from these e-mails: 42,767 number of networks in database: 29,646 number of persons in database: 13,238 number of domains in database: 2,339 number of AS in the database: 224 More info of course at the RIPE meeting. If you have any questions about the database (from general to very specific) please send me a mail. See you in 11 days. -Marten

1 0

NIC Handles
by Daniel Karrenberg 21 Dec '93

21 Dec '93

Friends, after all the useful input from you and some more thought we have concluded that introducing the RIPE handles this year is too ambitious. So it will be January. I see two alternatives: 1) We wait until the RIPE meeting in order to discuss all the possibilities and make a firm decision. This delays introduction well into February. Database exchange with the InterNIC is also delayed until then. 2) We introduce like planned in the first week(s) of January. In order to address concerns quick and easy assignment we will operate a server for real-time assignments. If this does not solve the expected problems we can decide about local assignements at the RIPE meeting. In order not to delay database exchange with the NIC we favour option 2. About the real-time server: It will run on a special TCP port accessible only to local IRs. The server will accept a person object with "nic-hdl: assign" and immediately echo back the person object with the NIC handle or an error message. We will provide a filter "assignhandle" to go with it so you can integrate it into your own software (we will often run it in vi/emacs). We will also provide the filter mentioned in the paper which adds handles to an existing database without handles. Does anyone have real problems with option 2? Daniel

4 3

[Robert Martin-Legene: New fields for objects]
by RIPE NCC Staff 13 Dec '93

13 Dec '93

Any comments/ideas ? -Marten ------- Forwarded Message Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 12:54:43 MET From: Robert Martin-Legene <robert(a)dknet.dk> To: ncc(a)ripe.net Subject: New fields for objects Part D is completed if you're making the application on behalf on another organisation. How about making this a complete person-entry, and add a "via:" field in the "inetnum:" object ? - -- Robert Martin-Legene, DKnet, Fruebjergvej 3, DK-2100 Kobenhavn O, +45 39 17 99 00 ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Re: RIPE Handle document
by bonito＠nis.garr.it 09 Dec '93

09 Dec '93

> > The problem of delay in registrations by "regional" > registries could perhaps be overcome by an automated > "handle assignment" service by RIPE, where a handle > could be obtained interactively by authorised persons. > Given the turnaround-time with the new DB-software, > I really don't see where there is potential for delay > in registering objects? > But maybe we could (on paper) relax the rules a bit to > officially allow the registration of person objects that > are not (yet) referenced by other objects. > The software never prohibited this, as much as I know. > As NL domain registrar I'm used to honouring requests > for (new) registrations as soon as possible. I don't > like a registration to become a multi-stage procedure: > - register the domain and associated person(s) in > my NL database; > - wait till the whole business has been submitted > to the RIPE database (weekly, automated); > - see what handles RIPE has assigned and add them > to the entries in my NL database; > - wait again till the stuff has been sent to RIPE. > Even if I would make the submission a daily one, it > would still take several days before the registration > in my NL database and in the RIPE database have been > finalised. If RIPE would provide an interactive way > of obtaining a handle, then there would be no delay. > > Piet Piet, you've clearly expressed the same worries I actually have: I don't like the RIPE registration process to become not as fast and easy as it is now! But I don't see why the solution of distributing Internet handles assignment (the actual way is not the point: using number ranges, appending different suffixes, ...) is not taken in serious consideration. ---------- ---------- Antonio_Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito(a)nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 (50) 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Telex: 500371 CNUCE I 56126 PISA Italy Fax: +39 (50) 904052 ---------- ----------

1 0

Re: RIPE Handle document
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 09 Dec '93

09 Dec '93

Piet and others, >True, but that would only make the problem worse: >then you could have e.g. 10 Person objects which >are each unique in their own [source] context but >which actually refer to one and the same person. >In such a case I'd still prefer to have a specific >tag (like a handle) assigned centrally by RIPE even >when the source of the object is not RIPE. I agree with your point of view, that we should thrive to have only _very_ few instances that assign handles! Everything else is calling for trouble. >The problem of delay in registrations by "regional" >registries could perhaps be overcome by an automated >"handle assignment" service by RIPE, where a handle >could be obtained interactively by authorised persons. Given the turnaround-time with the new DB-software, I really don't see where there is potential for delay in registering objects? But maybe we could (on paper) relax the rules a bit to officially allow the registration of person objects that are not (yet) referenced by other objects. The software never prohibited this, as much as I know. Maybe this is the time to think about combining the idea of an interactive handle generator and an interactive (eg. prompt-mode) (person-)object registration script, offered on a special telnet port at the NCC? Wilfried. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : Wilfried.Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at (Internet) Computer Center - ACOnet : Z00WWR01(a)AWIUNI11.BITNET (EARN) Vienna University : 29133::WOEBER (SPAN/HEPnet) Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Tel: +43 1 4065822 355 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : Fax: +43 1 4065822 170 NIC: WW144 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

RE: RIPE Handle document
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 07 Dec '93

07 Dec '93

>RIPE Handle > >Internet handles issued by the RIPE NCC are called RIPE handles. >The purpose of a RIPE handle is to uniquely identify a person in the >RIPE network management database and other related databases that >choose to use it. so we manufacture Internet Handles! >... >All persons in the RIPE database must have an Internet handle. > agreed. >Every person in any of the databases keeping contact information >should only use Internet handle. sure enough, probably this isn't telling me what was intended? > >Assignment >... >It should be noted that the RIPE NCC only issues RIPE handles and >not other Internet handles. this is in contradiction to the first assumption!??? ____________________ I think the wording, and maybe even the thinking, has to be made a little bit clearer (at least to me :-) I'm reading the proposal to mean the following: - On a global scale, we need unique handles (Internet Handles). - InterNIC doesn't provide them for use by Regional Registries - There is an agreement that Internet Handles are manufactured in a distributed way by appending the Regional Registry code - It doesn' matter from where I get the handle, it is an Intenet Handle that is globally unique and valid. (ie. I can get my person object registered in any database other than the RIPE-DB with my RIPE-assigned Internet Handle) **correct?? - we have to get this going by a) converting all existing handles, which have by definition been assigned by the InterNIC into the -INIC format/syntax b) assign -RIPE format/syntax handles for all the others in the RIPE-DB - to keep it going we refuse person objects, that do neither come with an Internet Handle, nor request assignment by the agreed string of "assign" Anything wrong with this? Wilfried (WW144-INIC :-)

2 1

RIPE Handle document
by Marten Terpstra 07 Dec '93

07 Dec '93

Folks, Please find below the draft document to implement RIPE handles in the RIPE database. Please read it carefully, since it will impact registration of people. Current timescales: from draft to official document: Dec 13th (1 week from now) implementation: Dec 20th (2 weeks from now) Comments please. -Marten Internet Handles and the RIPE Database Daniel Karrenberg Marten Terpstra Document ID: ripe-nh ABSTRACT This document describes the need for unique iden- tifiers for Persons and the way they are assigned and used in the RIPE database. Why Internet Handles Like other registry databases the RIPE Network Management Database [ripe-013] stores information about contact persons for various other object types stored in the database such as network numbers, DNS domains and autonomous systems. Data about each contact person is stored in a "person" object which in turn is referenced by the other objects. This way data about a real person is stored only in one place, the person object. This has the advantage that any necessary changes need to be done only in one place rather than in each object the person is a contact for. Originally each person was uniquely identified by their full name and references were implemented by storing the full person name in the contact attributes of other objects. A side effect of this was that the database could not store more than one person with the same full name. When this ("John Smith") problem became an issue another attribute was needed to disambiguate persons with the same name. Since the InterNIC was already using a "NIC Handle" scheme and it was hoped to unify the registry databases quickly these handles were used. NIC handles are unique identifiers consisting of two or three aphabetic cahracters and a serial number. A "nic-hdl" attribute was added to the person object. If present this "nic-hdl" is now used together with the "person" attribute to uniquely identify a person. The value of nic-hdl is a search key for the database and can be used to reference a contact person in the contact attributes of other objects. A side effect of this is that all persons needing a handle to ripe-nh.txt - 2 - disambiguate them from another person need to be in the InterNIC database in order to obtain a NIC handle. This was not considered a problem because quick unification of the databases was expected quickly. As it turns out the assignment of globally unique handles from a single number space is not likely to be feasible. Therefore there is a need for more local assignment of unique handles. These handles will also be used in the database exchange between regional regis- tries. The regional registries agreed to create separate handle spaces by appending a suffix identifying the registry to handles creating a unique Internet handle. This document describes the procedures to implement this in the European Regional Internet Registry. RIPE Handle Internet handles issued by the RIPE NCC are called RIPE handles. The purpose of a RIPE handle is to uniquely identify a person in the RIPE network management database and other related databases that choose to use it. A RIPE handle is a string of 2-3 letters immediately followed by a serial number without leading 0s followd by the string "-RIPE". Legal RIPE handles are: AB1-RIPE AXA123-RIPE XYZ99-RIPE Normally the letters are chosen to be the initials of the person. The -RIPE suffix is used to disctinguish RIPE-handles from Internet handles issued by other registries. Internet handles issued by the InterNIC in the RIPE database will be suffixed by the string "-INIC" to distinguish them from other handles. All persons in the RIPE database must have an Internet handle. Every person in any of the databases keeping contact information should only use Internet handle. Assignment RIPE handles are assigned by sending a person object to the normal update address <auto-dbm(a)ripe.net> with "nic-hdl" value of "assign". The update process will then generate a unique handle, insert the person object with the new handle in the database and report back the handle. In case there already are persons with the same full name in the database the update process will include them in the ripe-nh.txt - 3 - report so that the user can check whether he inadvertently created a duplicate person object. Users wishing to obtain a specific RIPE handle (vanity handle) can request that by specifying it after the "assign" string, e.g. "assign JB007-RIPE". If the handle in question is available it will be assigned. It should be noted that the RIPE NCC only issues RIPE handles and not other Internet handles. Usage The primary use of RIPE handles is to reference a specific person in the RIPE database, either in another object or a database query. Contact attributes can have the following types of values: John E. Doe full name not recommended AXA123-RIPE Internet Handle John E. Doe (JED12) full name (handle) recommended Wherever possible the use of full names on their own should be dis- continued. These references can become ambiguous unnoticedly at any time by another person with the same name being registered. The handle plus full name syntax is recommended because it makes it possible to detect typing errors in handles. Handles can also be used when querying the RIPE whois server. Matches will occur for either the full handle (AXA123-RIPE) or just the part before the suffix (AXA123). In the latter case all persons in the queried databases with a handle starting in AXA123 will match. Transition For the database exchange with the InterNIC it is neccessary for each person in the RIPE database to have a unique Internet handle. Therefore the NCC will assign a RIPE handle to each person without a NIC handle in the database on the 20th of December 1993. >From that point this handle must be included in any updates made to that person entry. The handle should be used in all references to a person in other database object. For the conversion of local databases the RIPE NCC will provide local registries and other interested parties with a tool which adds ripe-nh.txt - 4 - RIPE handles to persons in database objects. The tool will accept RIPE database formatted input files without syntax checking and will output the file unchanged but with handles added. The tool queries the RIPE database and can thus be run only after handles have been added to the RIPE database. Becuause there is no syntax checking the tool should work for databases with local attributes or objects as long as they adhere to the general RIPE database format. ripe-nh.txt

5 7

NIC Handles
by Daniel Karrenberg 02 Dec '93

02 Dec '93

This is the NCC's current thinking aout NIC handles. This is a quick dump, so If you have questions, please ask. Please comment! Daniel As decided at the last meeting we need to introduce unique handles in order to deal with ambiguities in the RIPE database. Especially accidental overwriting of persons will be a problem in the future with more than 10000 persons in the database now. After some discussion with the InterNIC we have concluded that a worldwide handle space is not realistic. In fact Australia has already started with their own space. Therefore we propose to start issuing RIPE handles as soon as technically feasible. Person handles will then be of the form XYZ123-INIC ABC457-RIPE .... Each physical person will eventually have one such handle only in order to facilitate database exchanges between NICs and database maintenance. RIPE handles will be assigned by sending in a person entry to auto-dbm with somethin like nic-hdl: assign which will cause the entry to be added with a new unique handle assigned. If there are other persons with the same name their entries will be returned as a check against multiple registrations. The NCC will *not* automatically assign handles to persons without handles on a "flag day". Local registries or the persons themselvews will have to do that. The reason for that is that all conflicts would need to be resolved beforehand and all persons notified of the change. This is too cumbersone, if not impossible. The NCC will flag possible conflicts present in the database today and help resolve them by notifying everyone involved and by assigning handles to all persons involved if necessary. In the future, handles will have to be used in the contact attributes (tech-c, admin-c, zone-c) in order to maintain unambiguous references. The recommended value for the contact attributes will be to list *both* name and handle in order to guard against typos in handles. Name only and handle only will also still be allowed. It might be necessary to disallow name only at some point when the majority of persons have a handle. Daniel

2 3

Re: NIC Handles
by Bjorn Eriksen 30 Nov '93

30 Nov '93

>After some more discussion with the InterNIC it looks like we cannot >avoid giving *everyone* in the RIPE database a handle soon. Otherwise >the database exchange with the InterNIC would be too difficult. Just wondered how long it would take until something like a handle had to be introduced. --Bjorn

1 0

Re: NIC Handles
by Daniel Karrenberg 30 Nov '93

30 Nov '93

After some more discussion with the InterNIC it looks like we cannot avoid giving *everyone* in the RIPE database a handle soon. Otherwise the database exchange with the InterNIC would be too difficult. So contrary to what I said last week we will need to do that soon. I will send out a draft RIPE document later today. Please comment a.s.a.p. so that we can act quickly. Daniel

1 0

Re: NIC Handles
by Erik-Jan.Bos＠SURFnet.nl 30 Nov '93

30 Nov '93

Daniel, > This is the NCC's current thinking aout NIC handles. > This is a quick dump, so If you have questions, please ask. > Please comment! My 2 cents... > As decided at the last meeting we need to introduce unique handles in > order to deal with ambiguities in the RIPE database. Especially > accidental overwriting of persons will be a problem in the future with > more than 10000 persons in the database now. > > After some discussion with the InterNIC we have concluded that a > worldwide handle space is not realistic. In fact Australia has already > started with their own space. > > Therefore we propose to start issuing RIPE handles as soon as > technically feasible. Person handles will then be of the form > > XYZ123-INIC > ABC457-RIPE > .... > > Each physical person will eventually have one such handle only in order > to facilitate database exchanges between NICs and database maintenance. > > RIPE handles will be assigned by sending in a person entry to auto-dbm > with somethin like > > nic-hdl: assign > > which will cause the entry to be added with a new unique handle > assigned. If there are other persons with the same name their entries > will be returned as a check against multiple registrations. > > The NCC will *not* automatically assign handles to persons without > handles on a "flag day". Local registries or the persons themselvews > will have to do that. The reason for that is that all conflicts would > need to be resolved beforehand and all persons notified of the change. > This is too cumbersone, if not impossible. > > The NCC will flag possible conflicts present in the database today and > help resolve them by notifying everyone involved and by assigning > handles to all persons involved if necessary. > > In the future, handles will have to be used in the contact attributes > (tech-c, admin-c, zone-c) in order to maintain unambiguous references. > The recommended value for the contact attributes will be to list *both* > name and handle in order to guard against typos in handles. Name only > and handle only will also still be allowed. It might be necessary to > disallow name only at some point when the majority of persons have a > handle. A still open question is what to do with people residing in Europe having a InterNIC handle already. You surely want these people to have a RIPE handle as well, I presume. This, however, would mean that such a person has two handles, which is confusing. Possible solutions?: - flag these people and assign them a RIPE handle and reject the INIC handle. - leave the INIC handle as is, and use this inside the RIPE Data Base. - Live with the confusion of more than one handle per person. A totally different thing is that there are people in the data base more than once. I guess this is really hard to flag automatically, but this needs to be sorted out as well. __ Erik-Jan.

6 5

Re: dom-net tag under domain
by Tony Bates 30 Nov '93

30 Nov '93

Actually, you need a little more so you only get one occurence of a net per object. This should take care of that. while (<>) { chop; if(/^\s*$/) { %done = (); } if(/^di:/ || /^dom-net:/) { ($tmp,$value) = split (/\s+/, $_, 2); printf "%-10s", $tmp; @list = split(/\s+/,$value); foreach $j (0..$#list) { $net = &munge($list[$j]); if(!$done{$net}) { printf " %s", $net; } $done{$net} = 1; } print "\n"; next; } else { printf "%s\n", $_; } } sub munge { local($str) = @_; local($ind) = 0; local($val) = ""; local(@add) = split(/\./, $str); foreach $ind (0..$#add) { if ($add[0] < 128) { $val = "$add[0]".".0.0.0"; return $val; } if ($add[0] < 192) { $val = "$add[0]"."."."$add[1]".".0.0"; return $val; } if ($add[0] < 224) { $val = "$add[0]"."."."$add[1]"."."."$add[2]".".0"; return $val; } } } Hope this was of some help, --Tony.

1 0

dom-net tag under domain
by bonito＠nis.garr.it 30 Nov '93

30 Nov '93

Dear NCC people, I think that too strict sintax checking is applied in the case of the dom-net database field. An example follows. We are deploying technology to obsolete networks classes (A,B,C,...) and at the same time the RIPE database checking rules do not take into account the actual usage of dear old subnetworks? In practice very often a number of subnetworks of a class B network are used to host machines in a domain while other subnetworks are used to host machines of a different domain. This is common for large networks in a city. We would like the checking rules to be relaxed in this case. Could you please do that? ---------- ---------- Antonio_Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito(a)nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 (50) 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Telex: 500371 CNUCE I 56126 PISA Italy Fax: +39 (50) 904052 ---------- ---------- Forwarded message: > From giuliana Mon Nov 29 14:47:06 1993 > From: giuliana (Giuliana Tamorri) > Message-Id: <9311291347.AA07375(a)jolly.nis.garr.it> > Subject: > To: bonito (Antonio_Blasco Bonito) > Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 14:47:04 MET > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] > > domain: astro.it > x400-domain: c=it; admd=garr; prmd=astro; > org: astronet > admin-c: Leopoldo Benacchio > tech-c: Roberto Di Luca > postmaster: Roberto Di Luca > zone-c: Roberto Di Luca > nserver: 137.204.64.15 boas3.bo.astro.it > nserver: 192.12.192.5 dns.nis.garr.it > dom-net: 137.204.64.0 137.204.51.0 192.94.71.0 150.217.20.0 > dom-net: 143.167.30.0 147.162.26.0 130.192.100.0 140.105.72.0 > dom-net: 192.84.153.0 192.9.200.0 > remarks: national astronomical observatory network > changed: <DILUCA(a)ALMA02.CINECA.IT> 930602 > source: TEST > *ERROR*: syntax error in "dom-net" - illegal IP network number 137.204.64.0 > *ERROR*: syntax error in "dom-net" - illegal IP network number 143.167.30.0 >

3 6

Fundamental problem with mandatory field zone-c
by Andreas Schachtner 26 Nov '93

26 Nov '93

domain: AIC.DE descr: AIC Software GmbH descr: Muenchen admin-c: Gottfried Bartmuss tech-c: Gottfried Bartmuss source: RIPE *ERROR*: mandatory field "zone-c" missing *ERROR*: mandatory field "changed" missing ; <<>> DiG 2.0 <<>> @deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de aic.de. any ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY , status: NOERROR, id: 10 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra ; Ques: 1, Ans: 1, Auth: 0, Addit: 1 ;; QUESTIONS: ;; aic.de, type = ANY, class = IN ;; ANSWERS: aic.de. 86400 MX 190 mail.Germany.EU.net. ;; ADDITIONAL RECORDS: mail.Germany.EU.net. 86400 A 192.76.144.65 ;; Sent 1 pkts, answer found in time: 18 msec ;; FROM: foobar to SERVER: deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de 192.35.64.34 ;; WHEN: Fri Nov 26 11:42:36 1993 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 24 rcvd: 75 There is no zone for aic.de, thus there is no zone contact. Opinions ? Andreas Schachtner afs(a)Germany.EU.net === ____ === EUnet Deutschland GmbH === / / / ___ ___ _/_ === Emil-Figge-Str. 80 === /---- / / / / /___/ / === D-44227 Dortmund === /____ /___/ / / /___ / === ===== ===== Tel. +49 231 972 00 ===== Connecting Europe since 1982 ===== Fax +49 231 972 1111

6 6