- db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 03 Jul '00

03 Jul '00

Hi, I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and roles had also "DENIC" as source. But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE RIPE Database Administratio To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net, db-wg(a)ripe.net, local-ir(a)ripe.net n cc: <ripe-dbm@rip Subject: Deletion of .de domain objects e.net> Sent by: owner-lir-wg@ ripe.net 29.06.00 12:45 -------- Dear Colleauges, We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central European Summer Time. If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net. -- Filippo Portera

17 22

NEW MAILINGLIST for .de-issues !!
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello this is my very last mail (for now ;-) ) for things concerning DE-domains as I think (and it was told me) that the list was bothered to much. Further discussion could and should take place on the list public-l(a)denic.de You can subscribe to that list in simply sending an email to majordomo(a)denic.de with subscribe public-l in the body. You will then get a confirmation back which you have to send back again. I hope that this list will be a platform for the community to get in contact and discuss their issues with us. The prefered language on that list should be German. Regards Sabine Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

1 0

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

On 30.06.00 14:55 Entire Systems NOC <noc(a)entire-systems.com> wrote: > > Hi Gerd, > > [lir-wg stripped out] > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:49:27PM +0200, Gert Doering, Netmaster wrote: > > The RIPE-Meetings are open for everybody. > > Open for the ones with big pockets, right. > > > (or read the minutes, which are open on the web) > > See my response to Sabine Dolderer. Give me URL to any information > about this massive action somewhere on www.ripe.net. I can't find > any. I just found notices in the open available protocols www.centr.org/meetings/#technical Look at the 2nd & 3rd meeting/workshop Additionally I found an Action to the RIPE Chair in the minutes of RIPE 33 which was September last year. TLD-33.2 [Chair] Initiate discussion of issues arising around domain objects in RIPE database. Some discussion has taken place between interested parties, especially RIPE-NCC, CENTR and certain registries. Transferred to CENTR, for decision during next week (beginning 27 September 1999). I have not checked all documents but there should be more hints Regards Sabine > > > Best regards, > Daniel > > -- > Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc(a)entire-systems.com > Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany > InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 > GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc > GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

2 1

A change in the referred query result format
by Engin Gunduz 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Dear Colleagues, Please note the following slight change, which may affect some of the scripts using RIPE db: When doing a referred query, the users used to get a response starting with: The object shown below is NOT in the RIPE database. It has been obtained by querying a remote server: (host_name) at port port_no. To see the object stored in the RIPE database use the -R flag in your query. Since this text may be interpreted by some scripts as an object in the db, we have changed it to contain leading '%' characters: % The object shown below is NOT in the RIPE database. % It has been obtained by querying a remote server: % (whois.denic.de) at port 43. % To see the object stored in the RIPE database % use the -R flag in your query. % %%% Start of referred query result We have also added the last line, "%%% Start of referred query result", to clearly indicate where the referred result starts. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Engin Gunduz RIPE NCC Database Group

1 0

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Dear Stephen, On 30.06.00 15:00 Stephen Burley <stephenb(a)uk.uu.net> wrote: > > Michael Holzt wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 04:26:03PM +0000, Stephen Burley wrote: > > > That ones easy, it should never have been used for this info RIPE is the > > > rIPe repository not the domains authority. > > > > Perhaps it wasn't designed for this usage, but it was clearly the best > > system we ever had for domain registry. > > No it was the best publicly available without re-engineering it, which does not > give you (deNIC) the right to use it. long time ago in Internet history ccTLD and IP people are not divided and both did there best to serve the Community. In this time DENIC has also registered both IP numbers and domains. We were part of the RIPE community. In these times both parties agreed that it is a good idea to store domain data in the RIPE database and therefore RIPE has implemented this. BtW in this times the we also dreamed from handle referal between INTERNIC, RIPE & ARIN ;-). In the meantime we see that ccTLD-databases expands much faster than IP-databases. Thats life and we are in cooperation looking for solutions. > > > > You could use the same person > > handles for a number of top level domains which reduced the work in a great > > way. Now we will have to cope with different person handles for every > > registry, with complicated update procedures and so on. > > > > Good process, wrong DB, the software to run the identical DB structure has > always been available to use and create your own (deNIC's) copy cat DB taking > advantage of the fine processes put in place by the RIPE community and the > engineering of the DB team in the NCC. So there was never any need to populate > our DB just to take advantage of the DB structure - deNIC should have created > there own. Thats wrong. There were discussions in this time and there was a feeling that it's usefull. That feeling has changed and we take the consequences. Don't change history. > > > > > > The wiser solution would be, if the registries would have agreed on > > supporting the central ripe database by funding and services. I don't see > > how the costs can be lower for several independent registries than for one > > community-payed-for central registry. > > Look to CENTR for this not the RIPE community. Thats also not a duty of CENTR to serve a central database. It's a duty of the ccTLD manager and CENTR to look for a distributed solution. > > > > > > > > If you want to see what can happen when all this information disappears from > > ripe and will be moved to other registries, just take the DeNIC (or the > > CORE) as an example. For both registries i don't know how to update my > > handles or can do it only by asking an official registrar / member. > > > > This fragmentation of registries will only lead to unreliable and outdated > > informations in the databases. > > That is what CENTR is for, use it. > > > > > > > > > The only domains that are in there are the reverse domains for very good > > > reasons. > > > > No, the ripe database contains in the moment data for at least 21 top > > level (country) domains. > > > > Which is fine but i think it will also move to servers run by CENTR eventualy - > and again they are there for historicaly good reasons. they will move to servers managed by their local tld. > > > > > > > designed to for this use and so give the RIPE community back the level of > > > response from the servers/systems the community funded and frankly deserve. > > > > The ripe database was always very well in service. > > Wrong the most objects in the DB are now domain objects and most of the updates > are for person obs and domain obs - as reported at all RIPE meetings - and the > response time to updates is considerably impacted by the amount dom and person > objects being queried and updated. Regards Sabine > > Regards > Stephen Burley > UUNET EMEA Hostmaster > > > > > > > -- > > With kind regards > > > > Michael Holzt > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

1 0

Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello, speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we have (or even must) done the migration. First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. Problems: There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain their database for this amount of objects. There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or assist us in this kind of service. There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see rfc2782 for a documentation) Solution So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with the applicant. Whats necessary concerning a domainname? We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the only thing you need. Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses and so we will implement this very soon. I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and you see know the other side a little bit better, Regards Sabine On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > once again in english: > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think on > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no domain > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us could > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be a > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the role:s) > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) is > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info is > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german domain! > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the domain > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that even > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for us! > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is not > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > back a few years, please. > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC or > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop our > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > This can not be the way to our future. > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your DENIC > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > board... > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info(a)bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > Robert > Martin-Legène To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > <robert@martin- cc: > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of > .de domain objects > Sent by: > r(a)jenslyn.nisse > .dk > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > Hallo. > > This is a list in English. > > What did you write? > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC sähe ich sehr > sehr > > gerne. > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-Lösung, und wenn ich so an die > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > Die Lösung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten von > uns > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > Arbeiten. Mit einer Änderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > DENIC-oder-nicht können wir wohl alle leben, mit völlig neuen Formaten > und > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > nicht. Das DENIC wäre gut beraten, die RIPE-Lösung zu übernehmen. > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > unverantwortlich. > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen über eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces für whois > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > beschrieben, was für Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer für was zu > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > alle, > > zum Teil unnützen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > unnötigerweise zusätzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung der > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ändert und Infos rausfallen lässt, ist eine > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > Arbeitsweise > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank liegen. > Bei > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise für > uns > > nichts ändert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh übers DENIC oder > deren > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle direct > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn plötzlich > alle > > Änderungen nur noch über DENIC-Mitglieder möglich sind - für uns als > > nicht-Mitglied also nur über nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind und > > eine automatisierbare Möglichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > Land, > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein völlig neues Format rauslaufen. > Folge > > also? Wir müssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > Gruss > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > Coordination To: > <henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de> > > Center" cc: <owner-loca-ir(a)ripe.net> > > <ncc@mediasca Subject: AW: AW: Deletion of > .de domain objects > > pe.de> > > > > 29.06.00 > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie wärs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC Maintainerlose > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, wie > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > weia. > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon darüber gemutmasst, dass > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder überhaupt Änderungen > > vornehmen können und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > MfG > > Martin Ahrens > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer@bsmail.de] > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon bemerkt > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > Kram. > > > > Gruss > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > Coordination To: > <henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de> > > Center" cc: > > <ncc@mediasca Subject: AW: Deletion of .de > > domain objects > > pe.de> > > > > 29.06.00 > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat Daten > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gekürzter Form > > übernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > changed: test(a)nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > Übernahme? > > > > MfG > > Martin Ahrens > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: owner-local-ir(a)ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir@ripe.net]Im Auftrag > > von henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > An: lir-wg(a)ripe.net; db-wg(a)ripe.net; local-ir(a)ripe.net > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > roles > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > Administratio To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net, > > db-wg(a)ripe.net, local-ir(a)ripe.net > > n cc: > > <ripe-dbm@rip Subject: Deletion of .de > > domain > > objects > > e.net> > > Sent by: > > owner-lir-wg@ > > ripe.net > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > European Summer Time. > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net. > > > > -- > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

6 6

petition against DENIC's plans
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hi all, I've setup a quick and dirty Website to vote against DENIC's plans. Please sign: http://denicpetition.bsws.de I just copied my mails regarding this, so if there is anybody out to rewrite the text... please send them to hostmaster(a)bsws.de. Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE

3 2

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello Daniel, On 30.06.00 12:05 Daniel Roesen <noc(a)entire-systems.com> wrote: > > Dear Sabine, > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 10:39:51AM +0200, Sabine Dolderer/Denic wrote: > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > > have (or even must) done the migration. > > Please explain why you remove the well-working maintainer scheme. We don't remove the maintainer scheme. What we have done is to protect every Person which hasn't a maintainer with our maintainer to prevent people from deleting unreferenced objects. As these updates (~100.000) was generated, a lot of people started to recognize that there was a problem and sends updates with their maintainer. If you understand the RIPE queueing model you will know that small updates are served faster from RIPE than the bigger ones to keep chances fair. Therefore people saw that we try to put our maintainer to their one day earlier updated persons. They don't see that these requests are send one week earlier not knowing about the maintainer. As these updates were maid accidentally this was corrected later. BtW. If somebody wants to change a DENIC-P maintainer whith his own one. This can be done either by the DENIC member he cooperated with (prefered ;-) ) or by hostmaster(a)denic.de. BUT: Please keep in mind - we will go completely out of the RIPE-DB there is no need to create own maintainers for the meantime. > > > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > > laws. > > It is allowed. Every customer agreed that his information is published > in a public database. I want not to go too deeply in this discussion but believe me that it's not that easy. I still use these argumentation too hoping noone proofs it ;-). > > > Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > Regarding phone, fax and email addresses: with this logic even > phone books would be illegal. If you go for a telefon you are explicitely ask if you want to have additionally to the telefonline a phonebook entry. If you refuse you still get the line. > > > I am really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling > > that people felt we are doing things without thinking or good > > reasons or just to make them angry. > > Please explain why this was all negotiated behind closed doors > (RIPE-Meetings and hostmaster-l ARE closed doors) although it has > a wide impact on ALL domain customers and non-DENIC-members > (resellers). RIPE-Meetings are open to everybody. The minutes are published on the web. Why do you beleave they are closed? Maybe you can give me a hint where you think that these sort of discussions should take place. Best Regards Sabine > > > Best regards, > > Daniel Roesen > Entire Systems NOC > > -- > Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc(a)entire-systems.com > Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany > InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 > GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc > GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9 > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

2 1

Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

Hello, On 30.06.00 11:07 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > Hi, > > thats not really the point of our critics. > a) changes only be made by members???? as every DE-domainowner is our customer and we are responisble to him about the security of his domainname we must assure that changes are made in a verifyable and accountable way. It is important that there is a documented responsibility. > b) technical solution - RIPE's solutions are working really good, DENIC's > past solutions are poor no comment. > c) change in interfaces not acceptable changes in interfaces are sometimes necessary. But I am with you that this should happen very rarely and should be prepared very well and people should be informed very soon -- but we tried to make all this. > d) contact info's, especially phone and fax, are REALLY important for the > hostmasters to inform each other about technical probs. If this could be > against German's laws, just make these fields optional. we are only allowed to publish these things if the custoumer have signed that he allows the publishing. Currently we think that from nearly none of the persons in the RIPE-DB this allowence is there. For the future we plan to let the people the choice to publish these data. > e) putting so named "non-operational data" or "test data" which is > incomplete and partly incorrect in production systems (it IS in > productionis - just do an whoi-query...) is not acceptable sorry I don't understand these point. Maybe you can show me an example of these "test data". > f) plans making life for non-members harder -> DENIC tries to get more > payin' members???? As we are working on a costrecovery base (non-profit) more members don't means automatically more income. But surely are we are interested in organisations taking the responsibitlity and sharing the risk to run the German Registry as a self regulating body for the benefits of the German Internet Community. > g) plans to charge for person: and role: records? > h) to be continued... Regards Sabine > > pls see http://denicpetition.bsws.de > > Greetings from Germany > > Henning Brauer > Hostmaster BSWS > > ------------------------------------------------ > BS Web Services > Roedingsmarkt 14 > 20459 Hamburg > Germany > > info(a)bsmail.de > www.bsws.de > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > "Sabine > Dolderer/Deni To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > c" cc: db-wg(a)ripe.net, info(a)denic.de, > lir-wg(a)ripe.net, robert(a)martin-legene.dk > <dolderer@den Subject: Antwort: Re: AW: AW: > Deletion of .de domain objects > ic.de> > > 30.06.00 > 10:39 > > > > > > > Hello, > > speaking for DENIC ;-). I will try to comment about the reasons why we > have (or even must) done the migration. > > First of all I want to try to summarize the problems we are faced in the > past and then I will come to an explanation of the solution we choose. > > Problems: > > There were a lot of discussions in the past about domain-objects in the > RIPE-database and that they cause too much capacity for RIPE to maintain > their database for this amount of objects. > > There was a common understanding that RIPE is not a service provider for > domainregistries like ccTLDs but there were indeed suggestions to offer or > assist us in this kind of service. > > There were a lot of pressure from our dataprotection office that due to > our business we pubish data (or we urge provider to puplish data of their > customers) which is not allowed to publish under German data protection > laws. Mainly the existence of the inverse query feature and the publishing > of data like phone-, faxnumbers and email addresses was critisized. > > We have had also a lot of discussions about the issue with other ccTLDs > and with people from the EU commission. The fundamental outcome of these > discussion was that there is no real issue to export personal data from > the coutries to acentral database and that this should therefore stopped > very soon. If the data is stored locally everybody can impose individually > there dataprotection laws. Nevertheless there should be a central > entrypoint to look for domain-data and therefore we support the RIPE > referal mechanism and are looking together with other ccTLDs and the db-wg > from RIPE at solutions like using the SRV-RR for whois-queries (see > rfc2782 for a documentation) > > Solution > > So as I pointed out above there was no other solution than to migrate the > domainobjects to a DENIC based domainquery mechanism. People who followed > the discussion know that DENIC is on there way out of RIPE. Actually it > was a dicission made by the RIPE db-wg in Amsterdam (February?) that there > should be no domainobject in the database after June 30th. > > Why do we publish less data than RIPE does? > > I have tried to explain it also above due to German dataprotection laws we > are allowed to publish only "necessary data" without formal agreement with > the applicant. > > Whats necessary concerning a domainname? > > We agreed with the people from the dataprotection office that there is no > necessity to no more about a admin-c of the domain than his address > because if you need for legal issues to come in contact with him thats the > only thing you need. > > Concerning the tech-c and the zone-c he finally agreed that there is a > necessity due to technical urgencies to publish phone and email-addresses > and so we will implement this very soon. > > I hope I have help you a little bit in understanding our position. I am > really sorry that due to this discussion I get the feeling that people > felt we are doing things without thinking or good reasons or just to make > them angry. I hope you see there are - as usual - two sides of a medal and > you see know the other side a little bit better, > > Regards Sabine > > > On 30.06.00 09:39 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm sorry for that, received a mail in german and replied.... > > once again in english: > > > > I'd like to see a common procedure against the behaviour od DENIC. > > There are lot's of problems with the DENIC's solution, and if you think > on > > the past working of DENIC, you would really wish that there are no > domain > > or person or role-objects in a database controlled by them.... > > The current solution by RIPE (for the Handles) works great. Most of us > > developed tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on to deal with the > > procedure of creating, updating and deleting RIPE-Handles. All of us > could > > live with a change of the email-adress to send the requests to, but not > > with totally new formats and and totally different concepts. It would be > a > > good idea for DENIC to take the (really great working) RIPE-solution. > > The manner aof DENICs working now is inacceptable. Anybody making > > whois-querys with one of the uncountable webinterfaces gets the cripled > > contact data displayed. How the not with blindness strucked of us have > > seen, there is lots of data missing in the persons:s and role:s-data: > > remarks, mnt-by, phone, fax, trouble, notify, changed and (for the > role:s) > > admin-c and tech-c. On Example: in our role-handle (compare whois -h > > whois.denic.de NOC54-RIPE against whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE) > is > > described how to make updates and who to cantact for whatever. This info > is > > now missing. Remember: this (in DENICs words "non-operational data" or > > "just a test") criple data is displayed whenever you query a german > domain! > > The most people won't hav the idea to query whois.denic.de for the > domain > > and then whois.ripe.net for the person:s and role:s, and I'm sure that > even > > no webinterface to whois does so. This means tons of senseless work for > us! > > It is really inacceptable insolence by DENIC to take data out of the > > RIPE-Database, changing it and then publishing it! With RIPE this is > > inconceivablily, have a look at their policy. I'm not sure if this is > not > > against german or europeen laws, but I'm not a lawyer. If I think of the > > future, all domain:s, person:s and role:s at DENICs database... beam me > > back a few years, please. > > Putting the domain:s in DENICs own database is acceptable. There is no > > really change for us (ok, I had to add two exra lines to our > > whois-webinterface's code...), because we register Domains through DENIC > or > > resellers (most of us are not members of DENIC because this is really > > expensive, so we are depend on resellers). With person:s and > > role:s-objects, surely all of us are working directly with the > > RIPE-Database. It is inacccetable if changes will only be possible by > > DENIC's members. This means weeks or eve months of handwork for us. Then > > the resellers will complete their (mail-)interfaces for changing , and > > parallel tio doing lots of work by hand we have to completely redevelop > our > > tools, webinterfaces, mailrobos and so on!!! > > > > This can not be the way to our future. > > > > Let's join to make DENIC know that this is inacceptable. Contact your > DENIC > > reseller and tell them what you think about this. They control DENICs > > board... > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > Henning Brauer > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > BS Web Services > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > 20459 Hamburg > > Germany > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > www.bsws.de > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > Robert > > Martin-Legène To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > > <robert@martin- cc: > > legene.dk> Subject: Re: AW: AW: > Deletion > of > > .de domain objects > > Sent by: > > r(a)jenslyn.nisse > > .dk > > > > > > 30.06.00 05:49 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo. > > > > This is a list in English. > > > > What did you write? > > > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de wrote: > > > > > > > > Ein gemeinsames Vorgehen gegen dieses Vorgehen des DENIC sähe ich sehr > > sehr > > > gerne. > > > Es ergeben sich zig Probleme aus der DENIC-Lösung, und wenn ich so an > die > > > Bearbeitungszeiten denke... > > > Die Lösung mit den RIPE-Handles funktioniert wunderbar. Die meisten > von > > uns > > > haben Werkzeuge/Webinterfaces/Mailrobos/.... entwickelt, um damit zu > > > Arbeiten. Mit einer Änderung der eMail-Adresse und einer Abfrage > > > DENIC-oder-nicht können wir wohl alle leben, mit völlig neuen Formaten > > und > > > Vorgehensweise zum Updaten/Anlegen von RIPE (oder dann DENIC)-Handles > > > nicht. Das DENIC wäre gut beraten, die RIPE-Lösung zu übernehmen. > > > Die Art und Weise, mit der DENIC hier vorgeht, finde ich > > unverantwortlich. > > > Jeder, der jetzt Abfragen über eins der zahllosen Webinterfaces für > whois > > > macht (oder gar selbst whois kennt ;-)) kriegt jetzt die DENIC-(test? > > > -)Handles angezeigt. In unserem Rollenhandle ist unter anderem klar > > > beschrieben, was für Updates etc. zu tun ist und wer für was zu > > > kontaktieren ist. Kommen diese Infos jetzt nicht mehr, laufen wieder > > alle, > > > zum Teil unnützen, Anfragen irgendwo zentral auf und verursachen > > > unnötigerweise zusätzliche Arbeit. Und das das DENIC ohne Zustimmung > der > > > Betroffenen Daten derselben ändert und Infos rausfallen lässt, ist > eine > > > bodenlose Frechheit. Beim RIPE ist das durch deren Policy ganz klar > > > ausgeschlossen. Wenn ich die vergangene und vor allem jetztige > > Arbeitsweise > > > des DENIC sehe, wird mir ganz anders bei dem Gedanken daran, das alle > > > Domain und vor allem Personenrecords bei denen in der Datenbank > liegen. > > Bei > > > den Domainrecords ist das aktzeptabel, da sich an der Arbeitsweise für > > uns > > > nichts ändert - registrieren, update usw tun wir eh übers DENIC oder > > deren > > > Reseller. Bei den Person- und Role-Records arbeiten wir wohl alle > direct > > > auf die RIPE-Datenbank, und da ist es nicht akzeptabel wenn plötzlich > > alle > > > Änderungen nur noch über DENIC-Mitglieder möglich sind - für uns als > > > nicht-Mitglied also nur über nen Reseller. Bis die dann soweit sind > und > > > eine automatisierbare Möglichkeit zum Anlegen/Updaten usw. von > > > Persons/Roles geschaffen haben, geht sicherlich noch einige Zeit ins > > Land, > > > und dann wird es da wohl auch auf ein völlig neues Format rauslaufen. > > Folge > > > also? Wir müssen erstmal Wochen- oder gar Monatelang Handles per Hand > > > bearbeiten und dann auch noch parallel (wenn die Reseller soweit sind) > > > unsere Robos umbauen... nein danke. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > <henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de> > > > Center" cc: <owner-loca-ir(a)ripe.net> > > > <ncc@mediasca Subject: AW: AW: Deletion > of > > .de domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 18:04 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wie wärs mit einem gemeinschaftlichen Complaint ans DENIC? > > > Einige an der Diskussion beteiligte Leute bemerkerten ja auch schon, > > > das es weder statthaft noch logisch sei, seitens der DENIC > Maintainerlose > > > Objekte mit einem DENIC-P Maintainer zu versehen. > > > Die nun bei einer Abrage des denics4 gezeigten Objekte enthalten ja, > wie > > > unten schon bemerkt, gar keinen Maintainer. > > > Wenn dieser Datenbestand nun doch Tatsache ist oder wird, dann... au > > weia. > > > In der Diskussion wurde ja auch schon darüber gemutmasst, dass > > > wahrscheinlich auch wieder nur DENIC Mitglieder überhaupt Änderungen > > > vornehmen können und das ist dann wahrhaftig grauselig. > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de [mailto:henning.brauer@bsmail.de] > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 17:40 > > > An: NCC Network Coordination Center > > > Betreff: Re: AW: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Kann ich nur hoffen. > > > Wie andere in der Liste (mit weniger Tomaten auf den Augen) schon > bemerkt > > > haben, fehlen auch die mnt-by's, notifys, phone, und diverser anderer > > Kram. > > > > > > Gruss > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > "NCC Network > > > Coordination To: > > <henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de> > > > Center" cc: > > > <ncc@mediasca Subject: AW: Deletion of > .de > > > domain objects > > > pe.de> > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hallo, > > > > > > was Sie (w.u.) bemerkten, ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. DENIC hat > Daten > > > aus Person und Role Objekten des Ripe NCC offenbar in gekürzter Form > > > übernommen. Allerdings sind alle Objekte mit > > > > > > changed: test(a)nowhere.denic.de 2000MMDD > > > > > > versehen. Handelt es sich hier ggf. noch um eine Testvariante der > > > Übernahme? > > > > > > MfG > > > Martin Ahrens > > > > > > Mediascape Hostmasters > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: owner-local-ir(a)ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir@ripe.net]Im > Auftrag > > > von henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2000 13:23 > > > An: lir-wg(a)ripe.net; db-wg(a)ripe.net; local-ir(a)ripe.net > > > Betreff: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just queryed our own main domain and have seen that the person and > > roles > > > had also "DENIC" as source. > > > But really more interesting: WHERE ARE THE REMARK:s???? > > > try whois -h whois.ripe.net NOC54-RIPE and whois -h whois.denic.de > > > NOC54-RIPE. > > > > > > Greetings from Germany > > > > > > Henning Brauer > > > Hostmaster BSWS > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > BS Web Services > > > Roedingsmarkt 14 > > > 20459 Hamburg > > > Germany > > > > > > info(a)bsmail.de > > > www.bsws.de > > > > > > fon: +49 40 3750357-0 > > > fax: +49 40 3750357-5 > > > > > > PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE > > > > > > > > > > > > RIPE Database > > > Administratio To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net, > > > db-wg(a)ripe.net, local-ir(a)ripe.net > > > n cc: > > > <ripe-dbm@rip Subject: Deletion of .de > > > domain > > > objects > > > e.net> > > > Sent by: > > > owner-lir-wg@ > > > ripe.net > > > > > > > > > 29.06.00 > > > 12:45 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- > > > Dear Colleauges, > > > > > > We are happy to announce that we have successfully completed > > > the first phase of migrating .de domain objects and related objects > > > to DENIC's own whois database. Now there are no .de domain objects > > > in RIPE whois database except for the top level one. > > > > > > Normal operation of our database has been resumed at 9:30am, Central > > > European Summer Time. > > > > > > If you have any question, please reply to ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net. > > > > > > -- > > > Filippo Portera > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Robert Martin-Legene > > > > > > > > > > > Sabine Dolderer > DENIC eG > Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 > D-60329 Frankfurt > > eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de > Fon: +49 69 27235 0 > Fax: +49 69 27235 235 > > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

1 0

Antwort: Re: Deletion of .de domain objects
by Sabine Dolderer/Denic 30 Jun '00

30 Jun '00

On 29.06.00 18:04 "Sascha E. Pollok" <sp(a)iphh.de> wrote: > > >I just got response from the denic regarding my questions about future > >updates to handles. As it seems the change of Handles will now only be > >possible for members of the Denic eG, so many smaller providers who aren't > >members, but are buying their domains from another one will have to redirect > >all changes to this member. I treat this as a very brain-damaged system. > > > >In the meanwhile we have Handles with the same key XYZ-RIPE, with different > >contents in RIPE-db and DeNIC-db (not only the missing remarks, but also > >phone and fax, and if someone makes changes to one of the two handles the > >other will keep the old data). > > F*ck. Then we'll have \S+-RIPE Handles in the DENIC-DB that are > inconsistenc against the Handles in the RIPE-DB. Who has planned this? > > When can't DENIC at least reference RIPE-Handles instead of their > own ones? We mirror the RIPE objects and there will be current no difference between RIPE and DENIC stored information. There is indeed a difference between RIPE and DENIC published information. And that is because of German data protection laws. We migrate to a sheme where personal data has to be stored whithin DENIC and after a while of migration we will stopp to acceppt RIPE Handles and at that point unreferrenced objects whithin RIPE can be deleted and updates have to be made in both databases. BtW: Every German ISP works also under this law and after my discussions with these office there is also a lot for them to do concerning information to their customers when the store privat data in public directories. DENIC is currently trying to get a understanding what procedures and documents a necessary for our ISP customers and will inform them. But concerning the parts where we are formally responsible we have taken after legal consultations the consequences. > > >Why has this mess had to happen? > > And why do I have the feeling I got not really informed by DENIC > prior this happening about the changes? There was more than one year discussion about this issue. It was discussed at many meetings. Before these migration we gave three time notice to our members. I feel really that we have done a lot to keep people informed. Sabine > > Sascha > > --- > Sascha E. Pollok > Internet Port Hamburg > Technical Staff / Network Operations > Grosse Reichenstrasse 27 > D-20457 Hamburg > Germany > Tel. +49 (0)40 37 49 19-0 > Fax +49 (0)40 37 49 19-29 > Email: sp(a)iphh.de > ICQ #38955239 > > > Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235

2 1