1 / 8

APNIC 14 DB SIG Report

APNIC 14 DB SIG Report. Xing Li 2002-09-06. Policy. Policy. Policy. Policy Outcomes. Proposal to suspend MAIL-FROM passed 9 vs. 0 (25) Protecting unmaintained objects will be discussed in the mailing-list 2 vs. 0 (25) AS Number Database Registration Proposal

sharonmcgregor
Download Presentation

APNIC 14 DB SIG Report

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. APNIC 14DB SIG Report Xing Li 2002-09-06

  2. Policy Policy Policy

  3. Policy Outcomes • Proposal to suspend MAIL-FROM • passed 9 vs. 0 (25) • Protecting unmaintained objects • will be discussed in the mailing-list 2 vs. 0 (25) • AS Number Database Registration Proposal • will be discussed in the mailing-list (by author)

  4. Authentication • NONE • No protection • MAIL-FROM • E-mail • Very weak protection • CRYPT-PW • Unix encrypted password • PGP-KEY • Public key algorithm protection Will be removed http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2725.txt

  5. Implementation • Proposed Timeline • 30 Sept 2002: Public announcement & mails to contacts of affected maintainers • 30 Oct 2002: 1st reminders • 30 Nov 2002: 2nd reminders • 17 Dec 2002: cutover • Affected MAIL-FROM objects replaced with CRYPT-PW generated by APNIC

  6. Protecting unmaintained objects inetnum object range Maintainer APNIC range APNIC-HM last choice APNIC member range MAINT-MEMBER 1st choice customer range MAINT-NULL

  7. AS Number Database Registration Proposal • P1 • The “import”/”export” fields MUST NOT be disclosed by whois database. • Whois database means registry information, not “IRR information”. • Route administration information should be disclosed by IRR databse. • P2 • APNIC is planning to merge whois and IRR database system to 1 system using RIPEv3. • Merging database is a good idea. • One aut-num object in RIPEv3 has two aspects of registry database and IRR which are separate things. • It is confusing. • We propose that APNIC should define a new object for managing AS number assignment.

  8. collaboration cut over Passed mailing list services mailing list

More Related