|
SIG: Database
Thursday 21 August 2003, Lotte Hotel, Jamsil - Seoul, Korea
Minutes
Meeting commenced: 11:20 am
Chair: Xing Li
The Chair introduced the session and explained the agenda.
Contents
- Draft charter
- Review previous open action items
- Policy for mirroring on IRR
- Privacy of customer records
- Protecting resource records in the APNIC Whois Database
- Whois database cleanup
- Discussion on action item db-15-001
- Current open action items
- Draft charter
Xing Li, CERNET
Presentation [ppt | pdf]
The Chair displayed a draft charter for this SIG for approval by attendees.
Questions and discussion
- The draft charter was adopted by consensus.
Action items
Top
- Review previous open action items
Xing Li, CERNET
Presentation [ppt | pdf]
- Action db-14-002 update: APNIC Secretariat has now completed this task, with results to be presented by Sanjaya later in the database SIG.
- Action db-15-001 update: No further discussion on this item had been seen in the mailing list. The Chair proposed that the issue be discussed at the end of presentations in the database SIG.
- Action db-15-002 update: The cleanup of the APNIC Whois Database has now been completed and will be discussed in a presentation by Sanjaya later in the database SIG.
Top
- Policy for mirroring on IRR
Junichi Matsumoto, JPNIC
Presentation [ppt | pdf]
This presentation proposed that restrictions be imposed on the mirroring of Internet Routing Registries. It was proposed that each IRR in a chain of IRRs agree to the mirroring policy of the lower IRRs in the chain. The suggested implementation date of the policy would be the second quarter of 2004.
Questions and discussion
- It was questioned whether there had been a searchable database built to store IRR mirroring policies in relation to this proposal as it could be important that IRR administrators be able to use a central location to find policies for all IRR databases they wish to mirror. The speaker responded that a database of IRR servers had been compiled.
- It was suggested that there needed to be more discussion in the RIPE NCC region in particular. It was suggested that the proposal be raised at a NANOG meeting.
- In light of the need to bring the proposal to the attention of the wider Internet community, it was suggested that perhaps 2004 was too soon an implementation date.
- It was suggested that the preferred case was to have routing information publicly available, but that there should also be a mechanism to allow other routing information to remain private.
- There was a comment that if private routing information was held, it would be in the administrator's own database and it would not be exported to anybody else. If software was used to import routing information, it would query all the available routing registries. Therefore it was questioned why there was a need to propagate data between registries. It was suggested that the only reason for mirrored data would be a human user typing at a keyboard trying to find information from the one IRR access point. It was suggested that this was a different issue about querying and not about mirroring.
- It was commented that private routing policy data would consist of peering information that would never be available in any public database. There was a comment from the floor that there would never be data in the APNIC IRR that would be of a type other than public. Therefore, it was questioned why anyone would care where such public information was mirrored.
- It was explained that the proposal wasn't an APNIC database issue. It was an IRR issue about private and public routing information.
- There was clarification that the aim of presenting the proposal at the database SIG was to obtain a consensus for the need to have mirroring policies between IRR databases.
- It was requested that the proposal be sent to the mailing list for further discussion and be presented again at the next APNIC meeting.
- Before a show of hands on the proposal, there was a request to clarify whether the proposal was for a generic consideration that an IRR must have a formal policy to prevent open distribution of the IRR without restrictions?
- There was a suggestion that the presentation was addressing the wrong problem. The problem may be how to fix whois rather than setting policies about how to distribute broken whois data.
- The suggestion to put the proposal to the mailing list was approved by consensus.
Action items
Top
- Privacy of customer records
Paul Wilson, APNIC
Presentation [ppt | pdf]
This presentation looked at the issues related to publicly available customer assignments in the APNIC Whois Database. Issues included privacy and inaccurate records. It was proposed that a new attribute called "hidden" be added to records so that they would not be publicly available. However, assignments would still be required to be registered in the database. Also, allocations would continue to be registered. The presentation also looked at the impact the implementation of the policy would have.
Questions and discussion
- It was noted that a similar discussion was happening in the ARIN region. It was noted that ARIN has already modified its database to have a flag similar to the "hidden" attribute proposed. The flag had been implemented to deal with hijacking, but could also be used to hide customer assignments.
- JPNIC noted that their organisation would have some difficulties implementing the proposal immediately, but that JPNIC supported the proposal in general.
- It was questioned whether portable assignments made by APNIC would also be hidden. The speaker explained that portable assignments made by APNIC would have to be registered openly in the database.
- Proposal was approved by consensus to be implemented in three months.
Action items
- Action db-16-002: Secretariat to implement proposal "Privacy of customer assignment records" (prop-007-v001) in three months.
Top
- Protecting resource records in the APNIC Whois Database
Sanjaya, APNIC
Presentation [pdf | pdf]
The speaker explained that during the Whois v3 migration in 2002, all unprotected objects were temporarily maintained with the MAINT-NULL maintainer. At APNIC 14, it was proposed to replace the MAINT-NULL with the maintainer of the parent object. A pilot project was subsequently carried out. The current proposal is to replace all MAINT-NULL occurrences with proper maintainer objects and to deprecate the use of NONE in the maintainer's auth attribute.
Questions and discussion
- No discussion. The proposal was adopted by consensus.
Action items
- Action db-16-003: Secretariat to implement proposal "Protecting resource records in APNIC Whois Database" (prop-010-v001). This will involve changing the maintainer of objects protected by MAINT-NULL to the maintainer of the parent object as well as deprecating NONE in the maintainer's auth attribute.
Top
- Whois database cleanup
Sanjaya, APNIC
Presentation [ppt | pdf]
The speaker reported on the implementation of action item db-15-001, created after the proposal for a data cleanup in APNIC Whois was presented and approved at APNIC 15.
Questions and discussion
Action items
Top
- Discussion on action item db-15-001
Xing Li, CERNET
Chair proposed closing the action item because no discussion had been seen. It may be reopened if anyone wants to start discussion on the topic.
Top
Meeting closed: 12:30 pm
Minuted by: Sam Dickinson
Current open action items
Minutes
|
