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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Registry - not a policy proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Registry - not a policy proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] WHOIS replacement, was RE: Registry - not a policy proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
michael.dillon at bt.com
michael.dillon at bt.com
Wed Jun 2 16:07:34 CEST 2010
> > The 'user friendly' thing to do is probably to go and find them the > > end answer, rather than referring them to somewhere else to look up > > the answer. Yes. > I believe that this is not always the best solution. Although this is > generally good idea when user is querying registry using some API with > well-defined output, I can imagine that simple redirection of text- > based > whois output from other registry can confuse the querying software. This is why RIPE and the other 4 RIRs should get together and replace the obsolete and inadequate text whois protocol. ARIN has already moved away from text whois with a RESTful protocol that outputs the whois directory info in an XML format. If all RIRs would support the same protocol, then referral could be done seamlessly. Even if the inquiry comes in on the obsolete text whois protocol, the RIR will be able to decode "foreign" whois lookups the same way as they decode "local" ones. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Registry - not a policy proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] WHOIS replacement, was RE: Registry - not a policy proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]