This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ncc-services-wg@ripe.net/
[ncc-services-wg] NCC service request - ticket robot test facility
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] NCC service request - ticket robot test facility
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] NCC service request - ticket robot test facility
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carsten Schiefner
ripe-wgs.cs at schiefner.de
Thu Oct 20 23:03:04 CEST 2005
Hi Timothy, Timothy Lowe wrote: > One of our members has asked the RIPE NCC to > provide a test facility for the RIPE NCC ticket robot. I don't have any particular view here as I don't have to deal with the robot these days. Having said that, DENIC, the german ccTLD registry, has a test registry system ready for its members for more than x; x > 3 years now. And in the absence of any negative feedback I consider it (happily) welcome by them. The real difference I'd see is that DENIC's robot is really an automat with no human intervention - when the NCC's ticket robot by its very nature requires that (aka. manpower). But I might be wrong here, see first para. So for the time being some of the comments here hold somewhat true for me - is there an estimation of the additional workload on the IP Resource Analysts to process these test tickets? Even by only alternately approving and rejecting every single one of them? But maybe even this human intervention can be automated in the test system on a per LIR basis then? Cheers, Carsten
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] NCC service request - ticket robot test facility
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] NCC service request - ticket robot test facility
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]