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/[email protected]/
[Fwd: Re: [Fwd: [db-wg] RIPE51 DB-WG Draft Agenda V1]]
- Previous message (by thread): [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: [db-wg] RIPE51 DB-WG Draft Agenda V1]]
- Next message (by thread): [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: [db-wg] RIPE51 DB-WG Draft Agenda V1]]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andre Koopal
andre.koopal at nld.mci.com
Wed Oct 12 11:44:46 CEST 2005
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 11:38:14AM +0200, Shane Kerr wrote: > Wilfried, > > I'm not 100% sure what the AP is, but let me explain what we have done. > > We have changed the behaviour of the database so that when you do a "-c" > lookup, we return the IRT object in the reply. I thought this was the > desired behaviour. You can see it here: > > http://www.ripe.net/fcgi-bin/whois?-c+193.78.240 > > It is possible to change the behaviour further, to make "-c" more useful > I think. One way of doing this might be to try to find the "best" reply > on a "-c" query. So, something like: > > - Find the closest matching INETNUM/INET6NUM object with "mnt-irt:" > - return the INETNUM/INET6NUM object (along with the IRT object) > - If there is no INETNUM/INET6NUM, perform a normal lookup > > Right now you have to do this on the client side. > > Anyway, we can certainly discuss this at the working group session. > > -- > Shane Kerr > RIPE NCC To be clear on my proposal, what I basicly wants is that 'whois ip-number' gives the correct abuse information. As we decided to go with the irt-object IMHO that query (without any options) should then output the relevant irt-object. That is the rational behind my proposal. Regards, Andre > > Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote: > > >Thanks to Andre for reminding me about that item! > > > >I am a tad puzzled, because a DB-WG Action on this reads: > > > >48.6 RIPE NCC To change DB behaviour to return IRT object > > [Complete] > > > >However, neither the web interface nor the RIPE whois client does > >return the irt information. Rather I get a route object under the > >heading of > > > >% Information related to 'prefix/length ASinfo' > > > >Any insight on that? > >Thanks, > >Wilfried. > > > >-------- Original Message -------- > >Subject: Re: [Fwd: [db-wg] RIPE51 DB-WG Draft Agenda V1] > >Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:28:57 +0200 > >From: Andre Koopal <andre.koopal at nld.mci.com> > >To: Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet <woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> > >CC: db-wg at ripe.net, RIPE NCC Meeting Registration <meeting at ripe.net>, > >wg-chairs at ripe.net > >References: <434BB603.4050409 at cc.univie.ac.at> > > > >On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 01:54:27PM +0100, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote: > > > > > >> Dear DB-WG folks, Chairs, Meeting! > >> > >> Here is the 2nd draft of an agenda for the DB-WG next week at RIPE51 > >> in Amsterdam. > >> > >> For time slot allocation please refer to the most up-to-date meeting > >> plan at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-51/meeting-plan.html > >> > >> > > > >Hi Wilfried, > > > >A while ago I mailed the db working group to request a changed behavour > >when you lookup inetnum's. > > > >In principle what I would like to see is that when an inetnum is returned, > >that the IRT object that is relevant to this inetnum is returned as well. > > > >For example, if you lookup inetnum '193.78.240' you get that inetnum > >returned, and the irt-object 'IRT-MCI-NL', as that is specified in the > >inetnum above: '193.78/15'. > > > >Note that this is different then the current -c behavour as that would, in > >this example' return the inetnum for '193.78/15' instead. > > > >Can you add this discussion on the agenda as well? > > > >Unfortunately I won't be able to visit the WG session myself, I hope the > >proposal is clear this way. > > > >Regards, > > > >Andre Koopal > > > > > >> Best regards, > >> Wilfried. > >> ________________________________________________________________________ > >> > >>A. Administrative Matters > >>- scribe > >>- list of participants > >>- agenda > >>- minutes > >>- "remote participation" coordination (if needed) > >> > >>B. DB Update (N.N., RIPE NCC) [~15 min] > >> > >>C. Review of security mechanisms in the DB (Peter K., denic.de) [~15 min] > >> . quality of CRYPT-PW, CRYPT-MD5, X.509 > >> . level of vulnerabilty in current dataset > >> > >>D. State of whois services, developments? (WW144, N.N., RIPE NCC) [~15 min] > >> > >>E. IRIS pilot frontend to whois (N.N., RIPE NCC) [~10 min] > >> > >>F. Fact finding: RoutingReg facilities at RIRs (Gert D, SpaceNet) [~15 min] > >> > >>X. Impact of "PDP" on how the DB-WG operates (WW144) [~15 min] > >> . ref: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-350.html > >> > >>Y. Input from other WGs > >> . DNS: secureDNS requirements for the DB > >> > >>Z. AOB > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
- Previous message (by thread): [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: [db-wg] RIPE51 DB-WG Draft Agenda V1]]
- Next message (by thread): [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: [db-wg] RIPE51 DB-WG Draft Agenda V1]]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]