[db-wg] Interest to continue NWI-9

Hi Dennis, 

I agree to close NWI-9 and proceed with opening of NWI-12 in order to explore ways
to modernise the NRTM service. With that said, please consider my interest also for
NWI-12. 


Best regards,

Stavros Konstantaras | Sr. Network Engineer | AMS-IX 
M +31 (0) 620 89 51 04 | T +31 20 305 8999
ams-ix.net

> On 29 Oct 2020, at 18:30, denis walker <ripedenis at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Job
> 
> I would agree that NWI-9 is finished, according to the way it is
> worded. I would suggest we create NWI-12 to move forward with a new
> version of NRTM. Perhaps you could write the first draft of the
> problem statement?
> 
> cheers
> denis
> co-chair DB-WG
> 
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 at 18:09, Job Snijders <job at ntt.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear group,
>> 
>> I think NWI-9 needs to be reworded, it in part has been over taken by
>> current events. Rereading https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2019-April/006236.html
>> what is described there actually already has completed.
>> 
>> RIPE NCC's NRTM servers are open to the public (this was not the case in
>> april 2019 yet). The NRTM servers can be used to *subscribe* to changes
>> in the RIPE database. When the NRTM client remains connected, it will
>> receive NRTM updates as they come in. THIS IS IN-BAND, AND FAST. The
>> rate of object change is very low compared to most information systems.
>> 
>> Looking at https://ripe79.ripe.net/presentations/118-NWI-9_S.Konstantaras_DB-WG.pdf
>> it is not clear to me what the problem definition is and how it relates
>> to the wording of NWI-9. The proposed optimisations are either not in
>> the RIPE IRR -> Cache layer (as NRTM is really near-real-time when
>> implemented correctly) but elsewhere in the end-to-end route server
>> functionality. From this perspective NWI-9 has already been completed!
>> 
>> Now, there is plenty to be left desired about NRTM v3. Even though it is
>> both a push and pull protocol and very fast (the push can measured in
>> single digit seconds), NRTM v3 clearly is an ancient protocol and the
>> operational community would benefit from a re-design of NRTM.
>> 
>> WORK IS UNDER WAY: LACNIC has committed funding for IRRd's NRTM v4
>> implementation. RIPE NCC's 'good for the Internet' community fund has
>> also been requested. That decision is still pending with the committee
>> operating that fund.
>> 
>> So what we have so far:
>> 
>>    - A collective desire to replace NRTM v3 with something else
>>    - The *only* two IRR server code bases of this industry have
>>      (partial) funding to make changes possible: IRRd and RIPE WHOIS server
>>    - A standardisation forum to publish the new spec: IETF
>>    - Multiple forums for input: RIPE DB-WG, IETF, *NOG, IRC, etc
>> 
>> If NWI-9 is kept open I would request it is reworded to the extend that
>> this working group requests RIPE NCC to commit to help design,
>> implement, test & adhere to what will become "NRTM v4".
>> 
>> I read Stavros' presentation where the above plan is listed as
>> 'Langzaam' :-) but the characterization may be a little bit off: there
>> is no Legal aspect to deal with: RIPE NCC made NRTM  freely,
>> contract-less, publicly and in real-time available already. Also keep in
>> mind that any new protocol will indeed need to be tested (even if
>> general purpose components such as JSON, HTTPS and WebSockets are
>> used!).
>> 
>> NRTM v4's design will have nothing to do with how NRTM v3 looks and
>> feels. NRTM v4 will be HTTPS based, I guarantee it! This project has
>> 'NRTM v4' as name to make it clear to the IRR operational community
>> where in the internet-stack this protocol belongs, but that it is an
>> improvement over version 3.
>> 
>> NRTM v4 can easily be something that is finished and deployed in 2021.
>> What needs to be done is fairly straight-forward, and lots of existing
>> tools can be used to make the job easier (like HTTPS and JSON).
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> 
>> Job
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0100, denis walker via db-wg wrote:
>>> Hi Stavros
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the comment. I have let Ed know about your interest.
>>> 
>>> cheers
>>> denis
>>> co-chair DB-WG
>>> 
>>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 at 17:11, Stavros Konstantaras via db-wg
>>> <db-wg at ripe.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi WG chairs,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I would like to declare that from our side we are still interested to team up with Ed and RIPE NCC colleagues to continue the work on NWI-9 item
>>>> in order to modernise the NRTM service with something better and more suitable for our current needs.
>>>> 
>>>> As far as I can recall, Ed and his team have several ideas to proceed forward with this subject, so I believe that we would be able to draw a clear development plan.
>>>> And as a kind reminder, not only us (AMS-IX) but the European IXP community has expressed interest on proceeding with that subject.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you and we are looking forward to discuss further steps on the subject.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Stavros Konstantaras | Sr. Network Engineer | AMS-IX
>>>> M +31 (0) 620 89 51 04 | T +31 20 305 8999
>>>> ams-ix.net
>>>> 
>>> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20201030/a8fad4f5/attachment.html>