[ncc-services-wg] querying national infrastructure

On 18.10 10:45, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2007, at 08:50, Jim Reid wrote:
> 
> >[Carsten Schiefner wrote]
> >>Rather it would only do so at the active and explicit request of  
> >>the respective ENUM Tier 1 registry - which turns your argument  
> >>upside-down IMHO.
> >
> >Er, it was me who was recommending that any monitoring would only  
> >be done at the request of the Administration concerned. For some  
> >vague definition of "Administration" which could include the Tier1  
> >registry.
> 
> 	From all of this discussion, I suggest the following three points as 
> 	a
> 	basis for agreement.
> 
> 	  (1) Clarity on the "service envelope" for DNSMON is desirable;
> 	  (2) Tier-1 ENUM zones are eligible for monitoring by DNSMON;
> 	  (3) A request for DNSMON monitoring of a Tier-1 ENUM zone will
> 		be accepted from a "responsible party" ("Administration",
> 		Tier-1 operator, National Regulator, ...) relevant to the
> 		zone in question.


Full disclosure:

speaking as ripe citoyen, but also: ncc staffer, inventor of dnsmon, 
proponent of the NCC as more than a number factory

Opinion:

This may be all that is needed in practise.

However it may be dangerous to limit ourslves this way.  As alluded to
in my recent attempt at humour: there may very well be a situation where
the RIPE community may want a certain service monitored because their
customers depend on it.  At the same time the service provider may have
a strong interest to hide the deficiencies of their service.  From the
point of the RIPE NCC, which interest should prevail? 

Fact: 

In the case of dnsmon, there has indeed been more than one occasion
where such deficiencies were quite obvious and the server operators have
indeed tried to get us to discontinue monitoring.  So far we have stood
firm on the side of telling the truth and providing a useful service to
the RIPE community and the Internet community at large.  In all the
cases I can recall the service was improved after a while. In some
instances I have been told personally that the monitoring results helped
to get the necessary resources allocated.  In one case this concerned an
important server directly operated by an agency of a nation state. 

Opinion: 

So as fas as I am concerned there is a definite benefit for the RIPE 
community and the RIPE membership in retaining the authority to determine 
what we monitor.

Daniel