Folks

I'm a bit late in sending these minutes out, for which I apologise. Please rapidly get any comments back to me.

Thanks

Nigel

Minutes for DB-WG at RIPE 69, November 2014

A. Administrative Matters [~10 min]
   . Welcome
   . select scribe (thanks to Nigel for volunteering again!)
   . finalise agenda
        No additional agenda items
   . approval of minutes from previous WG meeting(s)
        Minutes. Circulated only very recently so will hold for 3 weeks until 
approving.
   . review of action list
        AP67.4 [WW144] Take the issue of geolocation to the RIPE NCC Services 
Working Group as it does not seem to be heavily used. (Ongoing)
        AP67.5 [WW144] To check that the Anti-Abuse Working Group has properly 
specified both what should be done with mail that is sent to the abuse contact 
and (possibly) its format. (Ongoing)
        AP67.6 [WW144] To bring to the attention of the Routing WG the fact 
that the routing data as recorded in the DB is generally very poor (Report by 
Alexander Azimov) (Ongoing)
        AP68.1 [RIPE NCC] Remove the referral-by attribute (In progress)

B. Working Group Management (Nigel T.) [~10 min]
   . chair replacement procedure
        See presentation
        Procedure accepted
   . WW144 to resign
        Thanks to Wilfried for all his years service.
   . new DB-WG Co-Chairs to take over at the end of session
        Job and Piotr

C. Data Base Operational Update (Tim B., RIPE NCC) [~10 min]
        See presentation.
        All open issues are tracked on Github
        Release Candidate environment is available for at least two weeks prior 
to release so that full testing may take place.
        Documentation is on line and is tied to each release.
        RIPE Academy is providing DB training
        Abuse-c cleanup is well advanced
                Question: will one of the abuse contact finders be abandoned 
once this exercise is complete?
                Answer: no for the RIPE NCC region we will only check the 
abuse-c but the two tools can be merged.
                Question: When will API keys be authenticated by the system
                Answer: It is on the agenda but we are waiting for guidance 
from the WG
 
D. New DB-Software functionality (Tim B. RIPE NCC) [~35 min]
   (proposed, test, deployment)
        See presentation
   . referral-by deprecation
     - (based on deprecation guidelines)
     - present time table for 'referral-by'
        Removal in three phases over 4 months
   . from "changed:" to "last-modified:" / "created:"
     - explain new attr., examples,
     - timeline for implementation
        Three phases over 5 months.
        Comments (RV) was that such changes should be written down formally in 
advance.
        Response was that this has been extensively discussed on the mailing 
list and the details have been available for months.
        RIPE NCC noted that it would be relatively easy to produce such a 
document.
        [AP69.1][RIPE NCC] Come forward with a self contained document 
describing the migration 
        of the changed: attribute to the last-modified:/created: attributes  
proposal
        Another question was asked about objects in the database which have no 
changed: lines, what date was it created? The response was that 
        the relevant data will be pulled from the database and added to the 
object.
        RV asked that there was some syntactic markup to separate system added 
attributes from user added attributes. It was pointed out that the
        -t flag already tells you this. RV responded that this wasn't enough.
        It was asked whether all the attributes of auto-generated objects 
should be marked as such. It was agreed to discuss this on the mailing list.
        It was suggested that whatever history is available might be 
incorporated, including data from ERX and other registries. It was agreed to 
discuss
        in the mailing list
        [AP69.2][RIPE NCC] Come up with some straw man proposals for doing this

E. Personalised authentication? (Tim B. RIPE NCC, all) [~5 min]
        See presentation
        More detailed proposal following requests on the list and at the last 
meeting
        WG feedback is needed about how to do this.
        The proposal is to add person authorisation using a Single Sign On 
authentication.
        Maintainers are also difficult and non-intuitive
        Suggestion is to use roles everywhere. The advantage is that this is 
consistent and it is easy to see who is who
        An alternative is to have optional persons in maintainer objects
        There will be an issue with migrating existing maintainer objects. Any 
migration mechanism should ideally be capable of automation.
        Existing tools can be relatively easily modified to check all possible 
authentication methods.
        Suggestions were presented on how the migration to using roles could be 
semi-automatically handled.
        All comments gratefully received.
        Adding optional persons to maintainers could be easier to migrate.
        Discussion needs to take place on the WG
        Some comments on the perceived complexity of the maintainer object took 
place and it was suggested that some good
        concise documents on the maintainer object might help. It was agreed 
that it would not be a good thing to take away the maintainer object.

F. Maintainer Password resets?  (Tim B. RIPE NCC, all) [~5 min]
        See presentation
        25% of all ripe-dbm requests are password resets
        Rather than removing all authentication RIPE NCC is now adding SSO auto 
and allowing the member to get access that way instead.

G. "reviving" the WG, active participation (Job S.) [~10 min]
        See presentation
        Participation in the group has dropped off in the last 12 months. Why 
has this happened?
        Response from RV was that the database is in reasonable shape and is 
heavily used in production. The fact that
        it doesn't need a lot of modification is actually a strength.
        It was noted that database accuracy is very important and maybe the WG 
should be thinking about how to improve 
        accuracy of the data.
        It was noted that some of the changes proposed were taking place far 
too quickly for large organisations to follow.
        It was pointed out by the RIPE NCC training group that many users only 
use the database 2 - 3 times a year and find it difficult
        to keep current. Rapid changes would make this even more difficult.
        A call was made for IPAM developers to use the RIPE DB API and 
Softlayer responded that they used it extensively. The RIPE NCC
        said that they were very happy to work with anyone using the DB to 
improve it and improve the interface into it.
        
Y. Input from other Working Groups and/or Task Forces
        RV pointed out that the Abuse WG really needs to provide proper 
documentation on the Abuse-C attribute and he suggested that
        it should be made optional until such documentation is produced. It was 
agreed that this should be chased with the Anti-Abuse. It was pointed out that 
        Anti-abuse TF decided that the abuse-c should come first and the 
population of it should come second.
        A representative from the Routing WG noted that it is easy for 
"foreign" prefixes to be entered into the database and these can be used for 
various
        nefarious purposes. It was suggested that such foreign prefixes should 
be validated using RPKI. It was asked that the routing WG should
        come back to the DB mailing list with this request.

Z. AOB
        Geolocation.
        Tim Robinson from TXRX communication, saying that he has problems with 
getting his IP blocks recognised as being from the UK.
        JS agreed with the problem statement. There isn't a global source of 
accurate geolocation data. Should we make it easier to consume the 
        geolocation data already in the DB? 
        This appears to be an issue with the data providers who can't be 
bothered to provide the data in the database.
        It was pointed out that browsers generally have a very good idea of 
location and language and this is a more appropriate source of
        location data than the database.
        [AP69.3][RIPE NCC] To examine and report on possible solutions to 
improving geolocation data in the RIPE DB


Reply via email to