Hi,
If this was the db-wg, this could potentially be just a new NWI. :-)
If the problem statement is clear enough (and the fact many or most
resource holders don't really follow-up on policy changes is a good
kickstarter for me) this could be useful to have inside the LIR
Portal -- provided only the RIR and the LIR itself has access to it.
I don't see this as something that would improve the status of LIRs that
don't care, but something that may help the Registration Services.
And the "don't care" bit doesn't need to be linear. At some point, some
of the LIRs will want to check if their compliance is 100%.
I'm also not sure if a new policy proposal is needed for this, if this is
simply a tool, or a concept, we (ncc-services-wg) might request the NCC to
consider building. We might also want to build on the experience of other
RIRs, and even try to get a hold of "how much would it cost" to add this
tool here too.
Regards,
Carlos
On Thu, 14 May 2020, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ncc-services-wg wrote:
Hi Jim, Michele, Carlos,
(responding all in a single email)
What I'm saying is that not neccesarily *all* the bits in the other RIR
proposal make sense here, but others may do. Many details may be already done
by the RIPE NCC, others may be not.
So the key idea is that when you enter your LIR portal, you can see a dhasboard your
"policy compliance" status. Also, that when the tool detects something failing
(in your case), automatically send you a notification.
If you don't follow policy proposal development (many resource holders don't
do), when a policy proposal changes an existing policy or there is a new policy
and you many not be fulfilling that, at some point (when the NCC has the time
to implement the policy and the automated verification), and in some cases, an
automated verification will be automatically done and if there is any failure,
you will get an alert.
A bit longer explanation, but may be now is clearer?
If a resource holder doesn't care, this is not "this" problem ... RSA issue,
right?
And yes, regarding the ARC question, this could be also implemented in such way that if
something can't be automated, for example, requires filling in some data, the LIR can do
and the dashboard, will "re-calculate" if it is correct or whatever. Of course
we don't want to enter (as much as we can avoid) in procedural details. If some cases, it
can create a ticket to the ARC team or whatever, if can't be done also in that
semi-automated way.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 14/5/20 11:54, "Jim Reid" <[email protected]> escribió:
> On 13 May 2020, at 21:42, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ncc-services-wg
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I've clearly explained in my email that it was basically a copy and paste
from another RIR proposal, where they are missing things that in RIPE we have
solved already. Thinks need to be read in context to make sense, and I think it
makes sense to openly discuss ideas before coming into proposal, right?
This clarification helps a lot Jordi. Thanks.
However it doesn?t help in a good way from your PoV. If I understand you
correctly, you?re promoting a policy proposal from another RIR which solves a
problem we don?t have in RIPE because it?s already been fixed. Is that correct?
If so, this doesn?t seem to be a sensible way to proceed or make policy.
If we are to openly discuss this idea any further, I think you need to start
with a clear problem statement. What is it that you think needs fixing and how
does this proposal from another RIR do that? It may well fix their problem(s).
I don?t know or care about that. I?d like to know what RIPE problem(s) it fixes.
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
