1. APNIC 14 DB SIG Report
Xing Li

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 MAIL-FROM CRYPT-PW PGP-KEY Will be removed
No protection
MAIL-FROM
Very weak protection
CRYPT-PW
Unix encrypted password
PGP-KEY
Public key algorithm protection
Will be removed

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
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.
Finally, I would like to try to summarize this presentation, and rising up what I would like to propose.
The first point is that the route administration information especially “import”/”export” must not be disclosed by whois database for registry information.
It means that operational information such as route administration information should be managed and disclosed appropriately by IRR.

8. collaboration
cut over
Passed
mailing list
services
mailing list