Call for volunteers & Draft charter - RIPE Database Requirements Task Force
I would like to call for volunteers for a task force of 2-5 persons to review the RIPE Database requirements. Please drop me an email if you have suggestions or would like to volunteer. The outcome of the task force will of course be discussed by the community to establish consensus as described below.. The RIPE Database has been discussed at the last couple of meetings and while we have a database working group dealing with technical details it has become clear that a wider discussion in the RIPE community is needed. The database is fundamental to the work of RIPE. There are questions about what kinds of data it should contain, what degree of accuracy is required, and what purposes it should be geared towards. These broad questions are not easily be answered with a policy proposal. Participants in the BoF at the last RIPE meeting supported the creation of a task force that would develop a set of requirements, considering what the RIPE Database needs to do and what information is required. Daniel has been kind to draft a charter for the task force, which I belive is a good start for the work: # RIPE Database Requirements Task Force Daniel Karrenberg *Version 1.1* ### Rationale The RIPE Database is now almost 30 years old [[ripe-13]] (https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-013 "RIPE Databases"). During all this time, the community has developed the functionality of the Database incrementally. Today some new frictions have emerged such as changing privacy requirements and the use of the RIPE DB by parties outside the traditional community, specifically law enforcement. Because of these frictions and changing needs, the community consensus about the functionality of the RIPE DB has become less obvious. Therefore it is now time to take stock and to establish a clear consensus about what functionality the RIPE DB should provide in the future. ### Charter The RIPE Database Requirements task force shall develop a RIPE document listing all the [requirements] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requirements_engineering "Wikipedia") for the RIPE DB and their rationales. The task force is a small and focused drafting team of two to five persons and not a representative body. The task force will consult the RIPE community and other interested parties. Consensus building will take place in the appropriate RIPE working groups and possibly specific BoFs. The task force will regularly publish draft versions of the document. ### Document Scope The purpose of the document is to establish community consensus at the general level. The document will be the new requirements specification for the RIPE DB. It shall provide clear guidance for the evolution of RIPE DB functionality, including the removal of current functionality that is no longer required. The document will prioritise requirements as much as possible. The document shall list the purpose of each RIPE DB function and consider the relevant privacy aspects, making the document useful in the context of privacy regulations such as the GDPR. The document shall allow easy updates as community needs change. Software development, deployment and other implementation details are out of scope. Despite being scoped as a requirements document, the document shall not prescribe a specific engineering methodology for subsequent steps in the process. ### Methodology The RIPE Chair shall appoint the task force after a call for volunteers. Volunteers are expected to contribute significant amounts of text and to collect community feedback. The task force will regularly publish revised drafts based on this feedback. The task force may conduct BoF sessions to discuss drafts with the community. ### Time Line The task force will start its work at [RIPE 79] (https://ripe79.ripe.net/ "RIPE 79, 14-18 October 2019") and produce the *first* draft by December 2019. The task force will deliver a document for last-call at RIPE 81 in October 2020. If the community does not achieve consensus by RIPE 81, the task force will give a report listing the open issues and propose a plan to resolve them.
participants (1)
-
Hans Petter Holen