(Apologies, my previous mail was in HTML, I am replying in plain text).
--

Dear Colleagues,

Following is an updated impact analysis for the implementation of the 
"geofeed:" attribute in the RIPE database, which now also includes the Legal 
analysis. I will also update the NWI page.

The DB team are now working on the implementation, which will be included in 
the next Whois release.

Please reply with any feedback.

Regards
Ed Shryane
RIPE NCC


Impact Analysis for Implementing the "geofeed:" Attribute 
============================================================

"geoloc:" Attribute
----------------------
Implementing the "geofeed:" attribute does not affect the "geoloc:" attribute. 
No decision has been taken on the future of the "geoloc:" attribute, a review 
can be done at a later date.

"remarks:" Attribute
-----------------------
Existing "remarks:" attributes in INETNUM or INET6NUM object types containing a 
"geofeed: url" value will not be automatically converted to a "geofeed:" 
attribute.

The implementation will validate that an INETNUM or INET6NUM object may contain 
at most a single geofeed reference, either a "remarks:" attribute *or* a 
"geofeed:" attribute. More than one will result in an error on update.

Any "remarks:" attributes in other object types will not be validated for 
geofeed references.

"geofeed:" Attribute
-----------------------
The "geofeed:" attribute will be added to the INETNUM and INET6NUM object 
types. It will be an optional, singly occurring attribute.

The attribute value must consist only of a well-formed URL. Any other content 
in the attribute value will result in a syntax error.

"geofeed:" URL
-----------------
The URL in the "geofeed:" attribute will be validated that it is well-formed 
(i.e. syntactically correct).

The URL must use the ASCII character set only (in the RIPE database, 
non-Latin-1 characters will be substituted with a '?' character).

Non-ASCII characters in the URL host name must be converted to ASCII using 
Punycode in advance (before updating the RIPE database).

Non-ASCII characters in the URL path must be converted using Percent-encoding 
in advance.

Only the HTTPS protocol is supported in the URL, otherwise an error is returned.

The reachability of the URL will not be checked. The content of the URL will 
not be validated.

Database dump and Split files
----------------------------------
The "geofeed:" attribute will be included in the nightly database dump and 
split files.

NRTM
--------
The "geofeed:" attribute will be included in INETNUM and INET6NUM objects in 
the NRTM stream.

Whois Queries
-----------------
The "geofeed:" attribute will appear by default in (filtered) INETNUM and 
INET6NUM objects in Whois query responses, no additional query flag will be 
needed.

RDAP
-------------
The "geofeed:" attribute will not appear in RDAP responses. A separate RDAP 
profile will be needed to extend the response format to include geofeed. This 
can be implemented at a later date.

Documentation
---------------
The RIPE database documentation will be updated, including the inet(6)num 
object templates and attribute description (with a reference to the IETF draft 
document).

Other RIRs
-------------
There is currently no coordinated plan to implement "geofeed:" across regions. 
Other RIRs may implement "geofeed:" at a later date.

Legal Review
---------------

From a legal point of view, the concern is whether the geofeed attribute can be 
considered to be personal data, in which case the General Data Protection 
Regulation (GDPR) will be applicable for its processing (according to GDPR (Art 
4(1)), "personal data are any information which are related to an identified or 
identifiable natural person”).

We understand that the purpose of the proposal to add the geofeed attribute in 
the RIPE Database is not to identify the geolocation of individuals. However, 
if the geofeed attribute is inserted for registrations of assignments that are 
reasonably assumed to be related to one individual user, then the attribute 
will be considered personal data. This is the case for registrations of /32 
IPv4 assignments (i.e. one IPv4 address). The same may be considered for 
registrations of two or three IP addresses.

For the geofeed attribute to not be considered personal data, it must only be 
allowed to be added to registrations reasonably expected to be used by a group 
of people (not an individual user). The size of such a registration may be 
arguable.

In order to be on the safe side, we suggest to allow the geofeed attribute to 
registrations as follows: 
- For inetnum objects, equal or larger than the minimum allocation by the RIPE 
NCC, i.e. equal or larger than /24 
- For inet6num objects larger than the minimum recommended assignment to end 
customer CPE devices, i.e. larger than /48 (please see here - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690#4-2--prefix-assignment-options 
- “Best Current Operational Practice for Operators: IPv6 prefix assignment for 
end-users - persistent vs non-persistent, and what size to choose”)



To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/db-wg

Reply via email to