Mailing List Archive: nsp: ipv6

Re: Requested RIPE database object changes

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

pim at ipng

Feb 14, 2012, 2:59 AM

Post #1 of 5 (853 views)
Permalink

Re: Requested RIPE database object changes

[+ipv6-ops]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:03 AM, RIPE Database Notifications
<unread [at] ripe> wrote:
> This is to notify you that some objects in which you are referenced
> as a maintainer were requested to be changed, but *failed* the
> proper authorisation for any of the referenced maintainers.
Hoi Juan!

The 2002::/16 object is currently maintained by the people in
TOSE1-RIPE. May I ask what were you trying to accomplish by re-owning
the object to BTTEL-MNT ?

groet,
Pim
--
Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/

juan.cerezo at bt

Feb 14, 2012, 3:10 AM

Post #2 of 5 (794 views)
Permalink

RE: Requested RIPE database object changes [In reply to]

Hi, Pim.

It was a mistake of our ops people trying to create a replica of the 2002::/16 with origin AS8903 to pass the filter of the ipv6 transit provider.

My apologies...

Regards,

--jpc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pim [at] hosted [mailto:pim [at] hosted] On Behalf Of Pim
> van Pelt
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:59 AM
> To: ipv6-ops [at] lists; Cerezo Martin,JP,Juan,DMK2 R
> Subject: Re: Requested RIPE database object changes
>
> [+ipv6-ops]
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:03 AM, RIPE Database Notifications
> <unread [at] ripe> wrote:
> > This is to notify you that some objects in which you are referenced
> > as a maintainer were requested to be changed, but *failed* the
> > proper authorisation for any of the referenced maintainers.
> Hoi Juan!
>
> The 2002::/16 object is currently maintained by the people in
> TOSE1-RIPE. May I ask what were you trying to accomplish by re-owning
> the object to BTTEL-MNT ?
>
> groet,
> Pim
> --
> Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
> PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/

pim at ipng

Feb 14, 2012, 3:44 AM

Post #3 of 5 (804 views)
Permalink

Re: Requested RIPE database object changes [In reply to]

Hoi!

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:10 PM, <juan.cerezo [at] bt> wrote:
> It was a mistake of our ops people trying to create a replica of the 2002::/16 with origin AS8903 to pass the filter of the ipv6 transit provider.
I see. I think what you're after is not the inetnum: but a route6:
object with your origin: AS8903 and mnt-routes: RFC3068-MNT which
anybody on the RFC3068-MNT can sign for you and send off to RIPE db).

> My apologies...
No worries. I'm assuming things got worked out by now? If not, ping me
off-list and I can help set your route6: up.

--
Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/

cfriacas at fccn

Feb 14, 2012, 7:11 AM

Post #4 of 5 (796 views)
Permalink

RE: Requested RIPE database object changes [In reply to]

Hello All,

Pim, due to recent RIPEdb changes, the object is not completely visible
anymore -- auth: lines, i.e. MD5/PGP went away.

Afaik, the last person who updated the object is already in touch with
RIPE/NCC about this, to see what needs to be done. But i'm afraid our old
model of adding people/origins to this object is in danger... :-)

Regards,
Carlos

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012, juan.cerezo [at] bt wrote:

> Hi, Pim.
>
> It was a mistake of our ops people trying to create a replica of the 2002::/16 with origin AS8903 to pass the filter of the ipv6 transit provider.
>
> My apologies...
>
> Regards,
>
> --jpc
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pim [at] hosted [mailto:pim [at] hosted] On Behalf Of Pim
>> van Pelt
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:59 AM
>> To: ipv6-ops [at] lists; Cerezo Martin,JP,Juan,DMK2 R
>> Subject: Re: Requested RIPE database object changes
>>
>> [+ipv6-ops]
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:03 AM, RIPE Database Notifications
>> <unread [at] ripe> wrote:
>>> This is to notify you that some objects in which you are referenced
>>> as a maintainer were requested to be changed, but *failed* the
>>> proper authorisation for any of the referenced maintainers.
>> Hoi Juan!
>>
>> The 2002::/16 object is currently maintained by the people in
>> TOSE1-RIPE. May I ask what were you trying to accomplish by re-owning
>> the object to BTTEL-MNT ?
>>
>> groet,
>> Pim
>> --
>> Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
>> PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/
>

pim at ipng

Feb 16, 2012, 4:29 AM

Post #5 of 5 (777 views)
Permalink

Re: Requested RIPE database object changes [In reply to]

Hoi Carlos, list,

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Carlos Friacas <cfriacas [at] fccn> wrote:
> Pim, due to recent RIPEdb changes, the object is not completely visible
> anymore -- auth: lines, i.e. MD5/PGP went away.
Yes, I am aware. It's no longer easy to find out who can authenticate
as a maintainer, I think is what you're saying?

Perhaps we can simply add a remarks: line to RFC3068-MNT saying
'please mail ipv6-ops [at] lists with a signed set of
route/route6 objects if you want them to be added', or another list if
it's more appropriate (I used to run 6to4-ops [at] mailman but I
don't know if that's (a) still working or (b) uptodate).

> Afaik, the last person who updated the object is already in touch with
> RIPE/NCC about this, to see what needs to be done. But i'm afraid our old
> model of adding people/origins to this object is in danger... :-)
Juan and I did what I've normally done -- he sent me signed objects
(with his mntner) which I signed and shipped to auto-dbm. I'm not sure
which old model you're referring to, if that's different to this.

Thoughts ?

groet,
Pim
--
Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads