[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       rfci-discuss
Subject:    [RFCI-Discuss] what public database operatros can and cannot do
From:       Bruce Campbell <bruce.campbell () ripe ! net>
Date:       2002-02-08 22:41:54
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0202082234550.17272-100000 () x22 ! ripe ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Allen Smith wrote:

[ incidentally, this was meant to be a minor point on good practice. ]

> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002 Derek Balling wrote:
> >
> > > On a related note... would RIPE be willing to make available to the
> > > RFCI project a WHOIS dump. Something we could search on to say "well,
>
> So long as they don't decide that it's a harvesting attempt and block
> access by rfc-ignorant. This is also the problem that Derek has raised

If you meet the automatic criteria that says 'data mining attempt!',
you're blocked (or slowed down).  Contact the database folks directly if
you feel that you have a case for having a higher set of limits.

[ I've rearranged the wording here ]

[ on maintaining the database ]
> > Notifying the operators of the database is a courtesy, thats it.
>
> Yes. The operators of the database should really be courteous in
> return to those of us who are attempting to help with keeping said
> database accurate...
[snippery]
> you _are_ the ones who need to solve the problem. And the language of
> the person, or their motivation, in making said complaint does not
> alter that responsibility.

To a certain extent, the language used in the request does alter the
reaction.  The best analogy I can think of is to have your car stereo
stolen from a public car park, and then reporting the incident to the
police whilst describing the police in excessively inflamatory or
derogatory terms.  Your case will be put on file, but you probably won't
be contacted unless your car stereo turns up in a pawnshop that the police
are inventorying for other reasons.

[ on data ownership and private contacts ]
> > Circumstances such as ownership of the data may not permit us to update
> > the database ourselves.
>
> Then perhaps you should list contact addresses of who _is_ responsible
> for said data? For instance, if RIPE does not have the ability to
[snippery]
> > or update our private file in order to get the information
> > updated the next time they come calling (which may be some time).
>
> Private file?

See our policies.  As a RIR, a _lot_ of information is required seperately
to what is seen in the public database, as part of the requirement to
justify the address space requested.  In general, whats in that file and
not in the database (including private contacts) is confidential to the
business (ISP etc) in question and may not be legally released.

Regards,

-- 
                             Bruce Campbell                            RIPE
                   Systems/Network Engineer                             NCC
                 www.ripe.net - PGP562C8B1B                      Operations


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]