RIPE Handle document

bonito at nis.garr.it (Antonio_Blasco Bonito) writes
 * Marten writes:
 * > Please find below the draft document to implement RIPE handles in the RIPE
 * > database. Please read it carefully, since it will impact registration of
 * > people. 
 * > 
 * > Current timescales:
 * > 
 * > from draft to official document: Dec 13th (1 week from now)
 * > implementation:                  Dec 20th (2 weeks from now)
 * > 
 * > Comments please.
 * 
 * I think that starting from this reasoning:
 *   > The regional registries agreed to create separate handle spaces by
 *   > appending a suffix identifying the registry to handles creating a
 *   > unique Internet handle.
 * 
 * A method should be proposed:
 * - either to further delegate the creation of Internet handles to local
 *   registries, in particular to national registries (registry of last resort
 *   is the actual name?)

Well, we decided NOT to go for this model, since it would probably
create more confusion than it would solve. The tricky but here was
that we wanted to make things more distributed, without confusing
people with regard to nic handles. If there is only a limited set of
registries handing out handles, things can be overseen. Having each
and every registry assign their own handles with different postfixes
is a major pain for us, since we are already dealing with 50+
registries. Try and tell them all to do things right ... We will be
the ones chasing after duplicate nic handles, duplicate persons, and
more of these ....

 * - or to differentiate the database management software when it treats
 *   actual RIPE database or local registry database.

Well, that is implementation. What I have done in the software to
cater for the RIPE handle creation, if added some configuration
commands, and the nic handle creation and checks will ONLY be
performed if certain variables are defined. In general, none of the
local registries using the software will have to do nic handle
creation, so by simply not configuring it, they will not see that part
of the software ....

 * This is needed because local registries often use the RIPE-NCC database
 * software package.
 * 
 * Otherwise local registries have two choises:
 * 1- use (develop?) another database software
 * 2- define some trick to postpone the actual registration of a person entry
 *    in their local database after they have received the new RIPE handle
 *    from RIPE-NCC
 * 
 * I think it would be easier and better to define other suffixes which
 * could be used (and accepted by the software). The local registry then
 * simply send person entries which already contain unique handles to the NCC.

It is not that difficult. If the software at the NCC assigns a RIPE
handle on request, it will of course report back with the full object,
including the newly assigned nic handle. It is not difficult to then
forward that to your own software. Therefore I think step 2 is not
that difficult ...

 * 
 * BTW: Tomorrow is an holiday in Italy, so don't be surprised if I will not
 * comment further until thursday.