Keyboard Shortcuts
Thread View
j: Next unread messagek: Previous unread messagej a: Jump to all threadsj l: Jump to MailingList overview
Dear SIG members,
The proposal, 'Frequent whois information update request', has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 30 at the Gold Coast, Australia, 24-27 August 2010 .
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal? - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell the community about your situation. - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?
Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084
Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
________________________________________________________________________
prop-084-v001: Frequent whois information update request ________________________________________________________________________
Author: Tobias Knecht tk@abusix.com
Version: 1
Date: 2 July 2010
1. Introduction ----------------
This is a proposal for APNIC to regularly contact all APNIC current account holders with resources in the APNIC Whois Database to ask them to actively check that all their details in whois are up to date.
To actively check details, the object owner has to log into the MyAPNIC Portal and acknowledge the accuracy of data in their object(s) or update all existing objects if needed. The update date will be shown in the "changed" attribute of every single object.
2. Summary of current problem ------------------------------
Whois database data accuracy has been a big issue for years now. There have been several approaches to get better data accuracy within whois information all over the world.
There are two main reasons for data inaccuracy in whois:
a) Wrong data are published to camouflage illegal actions.
b) Wrong data are published because object owners forget to update the whois information as changes occur within their organization (staff changes, etc)
A secondary problem is data incompleteness:
- Sometimes, there are changes to the structure of whois data, such as additional mandatory objects or attributes (for example, the IRT object). Object owners usually do not immediately make these changes to the objects they are responsible for. So there are always data missing in the whois database.
3. Situation in other RIRs ---------------------------
ARIN conducts an annual POC (point of contact) validation process:
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#three6
There is no similar proposal or policy in other RIRs; however, if the current APNIC proposal is successful in the APNIC region, the author plans to submit a similar proposal for AfriNIC, LACNIC, and RIPE regions.
4. Details of the proposal ---------------------------
It is proposed that APNIC:
4.1 Send an update notification for all existing objects to the corresponding responsible organization once every X months.
This notification will explain that object owners must log in the MyAPNIC Portal and verify all objects they are responsible for.
The objects covered by this proposal are:
- inetnum - inet6num - aut-num - person - role - irt
Object owners must actively click and aknowledge the correctness of the objects they are responsible for.
- If an object needs updating, or a new object needs to be added (for example, an IRT object), the owner can do this via MyAPNIC.
- If a new object or attribute is made mandatory via another APNIC policy, then the responsible organization will be required to make this update, if not already made, at the time of notification.
Even if the owner only verifies existing data and has not made any changes, the "changed" attribute in the whois database objects will include the date the owner verified the object. This will give users of whois an idea on how recently the object owner verified the accuracy of the data.
4.2 Send update notifications to responsible organizations at times shorter than the regular period described in section 4.1 if APNIC is made aware that the organization's object contain invalid information.
For example, APNIC would send such a notification if notified of invalid information via the form at:
http://www.apnic.net/invalidcontact
4.3 Include a link in all whois output to APNIC form for reporting invalid contact information.
5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal ------------------------------------------------
5.1 Advantages
- A frequent reminder and the need to actively verify will solve the problem of forgetting to update objects.
- All objects will follow the latest requirements for registration in the APNIC Whois Database. For example if there is an mandatory field added within X months every object will be updated.
- More people will use the MyAPNIC Portal.
5.2 Disadvantages
- No disadvantages are foreseen.
6. Effect on APNIC members ---------------------------
Members have to update or verify their objects once every X months.
7. Effect on NIRs ------------------
It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to implement a similar service to keep their whois database up to date. But this would be another proposal.
Hello Tobias,
In regards to this proposal, we note it covers APNIC account holders. As such this means the proposal will not cover contact details of historical resources where the network responsible for the resources has no contractual relationship with APNIC. As written, this could also affect the list of resources associated with invalid contacts defined in section 4.5.2 of your proposal as written. Would you like to clarify whether you would like invalid contacts for historical resources to be included in the processes associated with section 4.5.2?
The list of historical resources can be found in section 2.2 of "Policies for historical Internet resources in the APNIC Whois Database" at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/historical-resource-policies
Regards, ________________________________________________________________________ Sanjaya email: sanjaya@apnic.net Services Director, APNIC sip: sanjaya@voip.apnic.net http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100 ________________________________________________________________________ * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
On 2/07/2010 3:59 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal, 'Frequent whois information update request', has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 30 at the Gold Coast, Australia, 24-27 August 2010 .
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal? - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell the community about your situation. - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
prop-084-v001: Frequent whois information update request ________________________________________________________________________
Author: Tobias Knechttk@abusix.com
Version: 1
Date: 2 July 2010
- Introduction
This is a proposal for APNIC to regularly contact all APNIC current account holders with resources in the APNIC Whois Database to ask them to actively check that all their details in whois are up to date.
To actively check details, the object owner has to log into the MyAPNIC Portal and acknowledge the accuracy of data in their object(s) or update all existing objects if needed. The update date will be shown in the "changed" attribute of every single object.
- Summary of current problem
Whois database data accuracy has been a big issue for years now. There have been several approaches to get better data accuracy within whois information all over the world.
There are two main reasons for data inaccuracy in whois:
a) Wrong data are published to camouflage illegal actions. b) Wrong data are published because object owners forget to update the whois information as changes occur within their organization (staff changes, etc)A secondary problem is data incompleteness:
- Sometimes, there are changes to the structure of whois data, such as additional mandatory objects or attributes (for example, the IRT object). Object owners usually do not immediately make these changes to the objects they are responsible for. So there are always data missing in the whois database.
- Situation in other RIRs
ARIN conducts an annual POC (point of contact) validation process:
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#three6There is no similar proposal or policy in other RIRs; however, if the current APNIC proposal is successful in the APNIC region, the author plans to submit a similar proposal for AfriNIC, LACNIC, and RIPE regions.
- Details of the proposal
It is proposed that APNIC:
4.1 Send an update notification for all existing objects to the corresponding responsible organization once every X months.
This notification will explain that object owners must log in the MyAPNIC Portal and verify all objects they are responsible for. The objects covered by this proposal are: - inetnum - inet6num - aut-num - person - role - irt Object owners must actively click and aknowledge the correctness of the objects they are responsible for. - If an object needs updating, or a new object needs to be added (for example, an IRT object), the owner can do this via MyAPNIC. - If a new object or attribute is made mandatory via another APNIC policy, then the responsible organization will be required to make this update, if not already made, at the time of notification. Even if the owner only verifies existing data and has not made any changes, the "changed" attribute in the whois database objects will include the date the owner verified the object. This will give users of whois an idea on how recently the object owner verified the accuracy of the data.4.2 Send update notifications to responsible organizations at times shorter than the regular period described in section 4.1 if APNIC is made aware that the organization's object contain invalid information.
For example, APNIC would send such a notification if notified of invalid information via the form at: http://www.apnic.net/invalidcontact4.3 Include a link in all whois output to APNIC form for reporting invalid contact information.
- Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
5.1 Advantages
- A frequent reminder and the need to actively verify will solve the problem of forgetting to update objects. - All objects will follow the latest requirements for registration in the APNIC Whois Database. For example if there is an mandatory field added within X months every object will be updated. - More people will use the MyAPNIC Portal.5.2 Disadvantages
- No disadvantages are foreseen.
- Effect on APNIC members
Members have to update or verify their objects once every X months.
- Effect on NIRs
It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to implement a similar service to keep their whois database up to date. But this would be another proposal.
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
On 23/08/2010 11:45 AM, Sanjaya wrote:
Hello Tobias,
In regards to this proposal, we note it covers APNIC account holders. As such this means the proposal will not cover contact details of historical resources where the network responsible for the resources has no contractual relationship with APNIC. As written, this could also affect the list of resources associated with invalid contacts defined in section 4.5.2 of your proposal as written. Would you like to clarify whether you would like invalid contacts for historical resources to be included in the processes associated with section 4.5.2?
Apologies, I should clarify that I'm referring to section 4.5.2 of prop-084 version 2 document here:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084
The list of historical resources can be found in section 2.2 of "Policies for historical Internet resources in the APNIC Whois Database" at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/historical-resource-policiesRegards, ________________________________________________________________________ Sanjaya email: sanjaya@apnic.net Services Director, APNIC sip: sanjaya@voip.apnic.net http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100 ________________________________________________________________________
- Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
On 2/07/2010 3:59 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal, 'Frequent whois information update request', has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 30 at the Gold Coast, Australia, 24-27 August 2010 .
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal? - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell the community about your situation. - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
prop-084-v001: Frequent whois information update request ________________________________________________________________________
Author: Tobias Knechttk@abusix.com
Version: 1
Date: 2 July 2010
- Introduction
This is a proposal for APNIC to regularly contact all APNIC current account holders with resources in the APNIC Whois Database to ask them to actively check that all their details in whois are up to date.
To actively check details, the object owner has to log into the MyAPNIC Portal and acknowledge the accuracy of data in their object(s) or update all existing objects if needed. The update date will be shown in the "changed" attribute of every single object.
- Summary of current problem
Whois database data accuracy has been a big issue for years now. There have been several approaches to get better data accuracy within whois information all over the world.
There are two main reasons for data inaccuracy in whois:
a) Wrong data are published to camouflage illegal actions. b) Wrong data are published because object owners forget to update the whois information as changes occur within their organization (staff changes, etc)A secondary problem is data incompleteness:
- Sometimes, there are changes to the structure of whois data, such as additional mandatory objects or attributes (for example, the IRT object). Object owners usually do not immediately make these changes to the objects they are responsible for. So there are always data missing in the whois database.
- Situation in other RIRs
ARIN conducts an annual POC (point of contact) validation process:
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#three6There is no similar proposal or policy in other RIRs; however, if the current APNIC proposal is successful in the APNIC region, the author plans to submit a similar proposal for AfriNIC, LACNIC, and RIPE regions.
- Details of the proposal
It is proposed that APNIC:
4.1 Send an update notification for all existing objects to the corresponding responsible organization once every X months.
This notification will explain that object owners must log in the MyAPNIC Portal and verify all objects they are responsible for. The objects covered by this proposal are: - inetnum - inet6num - aut-num - person - role - irt Object owners must actively click and aknowledge the correctness of the objects they are responsible for. - If an object needs updating, or a new object needs to be added (for example, an IRT object), the owner can do this via MyAPNIC. - If a new object or attribute is made mandatory via another APNIC policy, then the responsible organization will be required to make this update, if not already made, at the time of notification. Even if the owner only verifies existing data and has not made any changes, the "changed" attribute in the whois database objects will include the date the owner verified the object. This will give users of whois an idea on how recently the object owner verified the accuracy of the data.4.2 Send update notifications to responsible organizations at times shorter than the regular period described in section 4.1 if APNIC is made aware that the organization's object contain invalid information.
For example, APNIC would send such a notification if notified of invalid information via the form at: http://www.apnic.net/invalidcontact4.3 Include a link in all whois output to APNIC form for reporting invalid contact information.
- Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
5.1 Advantages
- A frequent reminder and the need to actively verify will solve the problem of forgetting to update objects. - All objects will follow the latest requirements for registration in the APNIC Whois Database. For example if there is an mandatory field added within X months every object will be updated. - More people will use the MyAPNIC Portal.5.2 Disadvantages
- No disadvantages are foreseen.
- Effect on APNIC members
Members have to update or verify their objects once every X months.
- Effect on NIRs
It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to implement a similar service to keep their whois database up to date. But this would be another proposal.
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hi,
first of all thank you for your question.
My opinion is, that all whois data needs to be part of this policy!
Is it technically possible? Could this policy be used to reduce the amount of historical resources?
If yes, this should be inserted as well!
How much historical resources are still existent today?
Thnanks Tobias
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 23.08.2010 um 03:58 schrieb Sanjaya sanjaya@apnic.net:
On 23/08/2010 11:45 AM, Sanjaya wrote:
Hello Tobias,
In regards to this proposal, we note it covers APNIC account holders. As such this means the proposal will not cover contact details of historical resources where the network responsible for the resources has no contractual relationship with APNIC. As written, this could also affect the list of resources associated with invalid contacts defined in section 4.5.2 of your proposal as written. Would you like to clarify whether you would like invalid contacts for historical resources to be included in the processes associated with section 4.5.2?
Apologies, I should clarify that I'm referring to section 4.5.2 of prop-084 version 2 document here:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084
The list of historical resources can be found in section 2.2 of "Policies for historical Internet resources in the APNIC Whois Database" at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/historical-resource-policiesRegards, ________________________________________________________________________ Sanjaya email: sanjaya@apnic.net Services Director, APNIC sip: sanjaya@voip.apnic.net http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100 ________________________________________________________________________
- Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
On 2/07/2010 3:59 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal, 'Frequent whois information update request', has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 30 at the Gold Coast, Australia, 24-27 August 2010 .
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal? - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell the community about your situation. - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-084Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
prop-084-v001: Frequent whois information update request ________________________________________________________________________
Author: Tobias Knechttk@abusix.com
Version: 1
Date: 2 July 2010
- Introduction
This is a proposal for APNIC to regularly contact all APNIC current account holders with resources in the APNIC Whois Database to ask them to actively check that all their details in whois are up to date.
To actively check details, the object owner has to log into the MyAPNIC Portal and acknowledge the accuracy of data in their object(s) or update all existing objects if needed. The update date will be shown in the "changed" attribute of every single object.
- Summary of current problem
Whois database data accuracy has been a big issue for years now. There have been several approaches to get better data accuracy within whois information all over the world.
There are two main reasons for data inaccuracy in whois:
a) Wrong data are published to camouflage illegal actions. b) Wrong data are published because object owners forget to update the whois information as changes occur within their organization (staff changes, etc)A secondary problem is data incompleteness:
- Sometimes, there are changes to the structure of whois data, such as additional mandatory objects or attributes (for example, the IRT object). Object owners usually do not immediately make these changes to the objects they are responsible for. So there are always data missing in the whois database.
- Situation in other RIRs
ARIN conducts an annual POC (point of contact) validation process:
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#three6There is no similar proposal or policy in other RIRs; however, if the current APNIC proposal is successful in the APNIC region, the author plans to submit a similar proposal for AfriNIC, LACNIC, and RIPE regions.
- Details of the proposal
It is proposed that APNIC:
4.1 Send an update notification for all existing objects to the corresponding responsible organization once every X months.
This notification will explain that object owners must log in the MyAPNIC Portal and verify all objects they are responsible for. The objects covered by this proposal are: - inetnum - inet6num - aut-num - person - role - irt Object owners must actively click and aknowledge the correctness of the objects they are responsible for. - If an object needs updating, or a new object needs to be added (for example, an IRT object), the owner can do this via MyAPNIC. - If a new object or attribute is made mandatory via another APNIC policy, then the responsible organization will be required to make this update, if not already made, at the time of notification. Even if the owner only verifies existing data and has not made any changes, the "changed" attribute in the whois database objects will include the date the owner verified the object. This will give users of whois an idea on how recently the object owner verified the accuracy of the data.4.2 Send update notifications to responsible organizations at times shorter than the regular period described in section 4.1 if APNIC is made aware that the organization's object contain invalid information.
For example, APNIC would send such a notification if notified of invalid information via the form at: http://www.apnic.net/invalidcontact4.3 Include a link in all whois output to APNIC form for reporting invalid contact information.
- Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
5.1 Advantages
- A frequent reminder and the need to actively verify will solve the problem of forgetting to update objects. - All objects will follow the latest requirements for registration in the APNIC Whois Database. For example if there is an mandatory field added within X months every object will be updated. - More people will use the MyAPNIC Portal.5.2 Disadvantages
- No disadvantages are foreseen.
- Effect on APNIC members
Members have to update or verify their objects once every X months.
- Effect on NIRs
It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to implement a similar service to keep their whois database up to date. But this would be another proposal.
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
How much historical resources are still existent today?
this is a good question. perhaps sanjaya can help answer this.
specifically, what % of apnic+nir space is legacy?
randy
We're getting this information and will share the finding asap.
Cheers, Sanjaya
On 23/08/2010 6:47 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
How much historical resources are still existent today?
this is a good question. perhaps sanjaya can help answer this.
specifically, what % of apnic+nir space is legacy?
randy
How much historical resources are still existent today?
this is a good question. perhaps sanjaya can help answer this. specifically, what % of apnic+nir space is legacy?
We're getting this information and will share the finding asap.
thanks!
though not your problem, might be nice to have this for all rirs
randy
Hello,
can we decide on putting all historical resources on the invalid list. And give them a reminder if possible to do whatever is needed to change their status from a historical to a "full" APNIC member.
I think this is something APNIC and the hole internet community would benefit from extremely.
Thanks and have a good meeting.
Tobias
Am 24.08.2010 07:41, schrieb Sanjaya:
We're getting this information and will share the finding asap.
Cheers, Sanjaya
On 23/08/2010 6:47 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
How much historical resources are still existent today?
this is a good question. perhaps sanjaya can help answer this.
specifically, what % of apnic+nir space is legacy?
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hi Tobias,
On 25 Aug 2010, at 2:42, Tobias Knecht wrote:
can we decide on putting all historical resources on the invalid list.
Do you already know that all contact information for all historical resources is invalid? If not, are you not suggesting that APNIC publish a statement which it does not know to be true? That seems most odd.
I can only assume that I have misunderstood what you mean. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
Many thanks,
Leo
Hi all,
Here's the break down of all historical prefixes in APNIC:
Potential members (but membership is non-enforcable): - Actively routed: 85 - Not routed but the holder wants to keep/use: 456
To be reclaimed: - Holder wants prefix returned to APNIC pool: 189 - Holder non-contactable: 1,326 (invalid contact)
Randy, I don't have other RIR's info, but as Louie said ARIN is looking at their data (thanks!). I'll ask other RIR as well.
Hope this information helps.
Cheers, Sanjaya
On 26/08/2010 7:58 AM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
Hi Tobias,
On 25 Aug 2010, at 2:42, Tobias Knecht wrote:
can we decide on putting all historical resources on the invalid list.
Do you already know that all contact information for all historical resources is invalid? If not, are you not suggesting that APNIC publish a statement which it does not know to be true? That seems most odd.
I can only assume that I have misunderstood what you mean. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
Many thanks,
Leo
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Here's the break down of all historical prefixes in APNIC:
Potential members (but membership is non-enforcable):
- Actively routed: 85
- Not routed but the holder wants to keep/use: 456
To be reclaimed:
- Holder wants prefix returned to APNIC pool: 189
- Holder non-contactable: 1,326 (invalid contact)
Randy, I don't have other RIR's info, but as Louie said ARIN is looking at their data (thanks!). I'll ask other RIR as well.
this does not answer my very specific question.
what % of /24 equivalents in the apnic region are legacy and what are apnic/nir member holdings.
randy
Dear Randy and all,
Sorry for the delay, been busy with APNIC 30 work! But here's the breakdown of APNIC's IPv4 resources as requested:
- Historical: 357,171 /24s (12%) - Current: 2,616,197 /24s (88%) - Total: 2,973,368 /24s (100%)
Please let me know if you need any other information.
Cheers, Sanjaya
On 26/08/2010 12:36 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Here's the break down of all historical prefixes in APNIC:
Potential members (but membership is non-enforcable):
- Actively routed: 85
- Not routed but the holder wants to keep/use: 456
To be reclaimed:
- Holder wants prefix returned to APNIC pool: 189
- Holder non-contactable: 1,326 (invalid contact)
Randy, I don't have other RIR's info, but as Louie said ARIN is looking at their data (thanks!). I'll ask other RIR as well.
this does not answer my very specific question.
what % of /24 equivalents in the apnic region are legacy and what are apnic/nir member holdings.
randy
thanks sanjaya
randy
Activity Summary
- 4839 days inactive
- 4839 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 4 participants
- 12 comments