From lists at niamodnikufesin.de Tue Mar 7 11:53:47 2006 From: lists at niamodnikufesin.de (Hank Hampel) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 11:53:47 +0100 Subject: [db-wg] Re: WHOIS changes In-Reply-To: <4409786F.6000304@snafu.de> References: <4409786F.6000304@snafu.de> Message-ID: <20060307115347.7d3035a0@warning.this.domain.does.not-exist.de> Hi Marie-Luise, On 4-M?r-2006 Dr. Marie-Luise Hansen wrote: > But how and where do I change the settings? This depends on what whois client you use. If you use the commandline whois client from RIPE you can just use the new flags on the commandline. If you use an other client it may not be able to "understand" the new flags so maybe you should switch to the RIPE client or use the web interface at: http://www.ripe.net/fcgi-bin/whois?form_type=simple&full_query_string=&searchtext=&Advanced+search=Advanced+search (this should be one line) Best regards, Hank From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Tue Mar 7 12:24:44 2006 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 11:24:44 +0000 Subject: [db-wg] Re: WHOIS changes In-Reply-To: <20060307115347.7d3035a0@warning.this.domain.does.not-exist.de> References: <4409786F.6000304@snafu.de> <20060307115347.7d3035a0@warning.this.domain.does.not-exist.de> Message-ID: <440D6D7C.1020201@CC.UniVie.ac.at> As an additional hint, many "stock" clients allow passing flags through to the server by including them - plus the lookup string - in quotes on the command line. Quoting prevents parsing by the local client. Hank Hampel wrote: > Hi Marie-Luise, > > On 4-M?r-2006 Dr. Marie-Luise Hansen wrote: > >>But how and where do I change the settings? > > > This depends on what whois client you use. If you use the commandline > whois client from RIPE you can just use the new flags on the > commandline. > > If you use an other client it may not be able to "understand" the new > flags so maybe you should switch to the RIPE client or use the web > interface at: > http://www.ripe.net/fcgi-bin/whois?form_type=simple&full_query_string=&searchtext=&Advanced+search=Advanced+search > (this should be one line) > > > Best regards, Hank Wilfried. From fredrik at sunet.se Tue Mar 7 12:33:13 2006 From: fredrik at sunet.se (Fredrik Widell) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:33:13 +0100 (CET) Subject: [db-wg] Re: WHOIS changes In-Reply-To: <20060307115347.7d3035a0@warning.this.domain.does.not-exist.de> References: <4409786F.6000304@snafu.de> <20060307115347.7d3035a0@warning.this.domain.does.not-exist.de> Message-ID: <20060307123204.A4832@bardisk.pilsnet.sunet.se> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Hank Hampel wrote: > Hi Marie-Luise, > > On 4-M?r-2006 Dr. Marie-Luise Hansen wrote: >> But how and where do I change the settings? > > This depends on what whois client you use. If you use the commandline > whois client from RIPE you can just use the new flags on the > commandline. > > If you use an other client it may not be able to "understand" the new > flags so maybe you should switch to the RIPE client or use the web > interface at: > http://www.ripe.net/fcgi-bin/whois?form_type=simple&full_query_string=&searchtext=&Advanced+search=Advanced+search > (this should be one line) Or, use netcat, always working no matter what whois-server or flags you use :) #!/bin/sh echo "-B -G $@" |/usr/local/bin/nc whois.ripe.net 43 > > > Best regards, Hank > > -- Best regards /Fredrik ------------------------------------------------------- KTHNOC, KTH, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden +46 8 790 65 17 ------------------------------------------------------- From m at mlnet.net Wed Mar 8 08:23:55 2006 From: m at mlnet.net (Matthew Smith) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:23:55 +0000 Subject: [db-wg] Re: WHOIS changes In-Reply-To: <20060307123204.A4832@bardisk.pilsnet.sunet.se> References: <4409786F.6000304@snafu.de> <20060307115347.7d3035a0@warning.this.domain.does.not-exist.de> <20060307123204.A4832@bardisk.pilsnet.sunet.se> Message-ID: <440E868B.9040306@mlnet.net> Fredrik Widell wrote: > On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Hank Hampel wrote: > >> Hi Marie-Luise, >> >> On 4-M?r-2006 Dr. Marie-Luise Hansen wrote: >> >>> But how and where do I change the settings? >> >> >> This depends on what whois client you use. If you use the commandline >> whois client from RIPE you can just use the new flags on the >> commandline. >> >> If you use an other client it may not be able to "understand" the new >> flags so maybe you should switch to the RIPE client or use the web >> interface at: >> http://www.ripe.net/fcgi-bin/whois?form_type=simple&full_query_string=&searchtext=&Advanced+search=Advanced+search >> >> (this should be one line) > > > > Or, use netcat, always working no matter what whois-server > or flags you use :) > > #!/bin/sh > echo "-B -G $@" |/usr/local/bin/nc whois.ripe.net 43 Also whois -h whois.ripe.net -- -B -G FooBar Regards Matthew From trudy at ripe.net Mon Mar 27 13:27:19 2006 From: trudy at ripe.net (Trudy Prins) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:27:19 +0200 Subject: [db-wg] Whois Updates down Message-ID: <4427CC17.6040106@ripe.net> [apologies for duplicate mails] Dear Colleagues, >From 11:30 this morning our Whois Update service has been unavailable. Currently, we are investigating what caused this problem. We expect Whois Updates to be available again in approximately 1 hour. We apologise for the inconvenience. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this issue, please contact . Regards, -- Trudy Prins RIPE Database Administration From trudy at ripe.net Mon Mar 27 16:01:44 2006 From: trudy at ripe.net (Trudy Prins) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 16:01:44 +0200 Subject: [db-wg] Whois Updates up again In-Reply-To: <4427CC17.6040106@ripe.net> References: <4427CC17.6040106@ripe.net> Message-ID: <4427F048.50706@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues Whois updates are operational again. The problem was caused by one of our real time mirrors. We will investigate to find out which mirroring connection caused the issue, in the meantime, we have disabled the mirroring process for all of our external sources: RIPE:2:Y:2278327-7509807 RADB:1:Y:299843-303044 APNIC:2:Y:1710606-1949350 ARIN:1:Y:2-3603020 VERIO:1:Y:20896-59002 JPIRR:1:Y:755-27263 We apologise for the inconvenience. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this issue, please contact . Regards, Trudy Prins RIPE Database Administration From schmid at switch.ch Mon Mar 27 15:00:50 2006 From: schmid at switch.ch (Ulrich Schmid) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 15:00:50 +0200 Subject: [db-wg] Since when does one need 3 nameservers for inverse? In-Reply-To: <200603271226.k2RCQiH8007901@diotima.switch.ch> References: <200603271226.k2RCQiH8007901@diotima.switch.ch> Message-ID: <4427E202.8070209@switch.ch> on 8.2.2006 11:10 Uhr Brett Carr wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: db-wg-admin at ripe.net On Behalf Of Hank Nussbacher >> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 10:19 AM >> Cc: rdns-project at ripe.net >> Subject: [db-wg] Since when does one need 3 nameservers for inverse? >> >> In the "Reverse Delegation How To": >> http://www.ripe.net/rs/reverse/reverse_howto.html >> it states: >> >> "NS Servers >> Ensure you have at least two nameservers that are >> authoritative for the zone. The resolvable names of these NS >> servers should be in the NS resource records of the zone. The >> nameservers should be on different subnets." >> >> Yet when I submit a request I get: >> ***RDNS: (related to set) ERROR (20 points): At least 3 nameservers >> are required for each properly delegated zone. >> We found only >> 2 in your submission. >> >> In addition the reverse delegation checker at: >> http://www.ripe.net/cgi-bin/delcheck/delcheck2.cgi >> doesn't flag only 2 nameservers as an error. >> >> What gives? >> > > Indeed you are right, something doesn't look quite right here. Thanks for > flagging it I'll take a look. > > Brett > Any news about this item? Changes to the domain objects are still rejected by the delegation checker due to the (wrong) requirement of 3 nameservers and this prevents us to perform simple updates (e.g. contact address changes). Regards Ulrich Schmid From brettcarr at ripe.net Tue Mar 28 09:38:29 2006 From: brettcarr at ripe.net (Brett Carr) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 09:38:29 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [db-wg] Since when does one need 3 nameservers for inverse? In-Reply-To: <4427E202.8070209@switch.ch> References: <200603271226.k2RCQiH8007901@diotima.switch.ch> <4427E202.8070209@switch.ch> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Ulrich Schmid wrote: > > on 8.2.2006 11:10 Uhr Brett Carr wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: db-wg-admin at ripe.net On Behalf Of Hank Nussbacher > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 10:19 AM > >> Cc: rdns-project at ripe.net > >> Subject: [db-wg] Since when does one need 3 nameservers for inverse? > >> > >> In the "Reverse Delegation How To": > >> http://www.ripe.net/rs/reverse/reverse_howto.html > >> it states: > >> > >> "NS Servers > >> Ensure you have at least two nameservers that are > >> authoritative for the zone. The resolvable names of these NS > >> servers should be in the NS resource records of the zone. The > >> nameservers should be on different subnets." > >> > >> Yet when I submit a request I get: > >> ***RDNS: (related to set) ERROR (20 points): At least 3 nameservers > >> are required for each properly delegated zone. > >> We found only > >> 2 in your submission. > >> > >> In addition the reverse delegation checker at: > >> http://www.ripe.net/cgi-bin/delcheck/delcheck2.cgi > >> doesn't flag only 2 nameservers as an error. > >> > >> What gives? > >> > > > > Indeed you are right, something doesn't look quite right here. Thanks for > > flagging it I'll take a look. > > > > Brett > > > > Any news about this item? > Changes to the domain objects are still rejected by the delegation > checker due to the (wrong) requirement of 3 nameservers and this > prevents us to perform simple updates (e.g. contact address changes). My apologies, we answered Hank directly but I don't think the relevant information made it back to the db-wg. If you are requesting/updating a /16 the requirement for 3 nameservers is correct, the 3 comprising of 2 nameservers of your own and the mandatory inclusion of ns.ripe.net. We identified a problem in the wording of the error message that the delegation checker provides and this is being updated by our software engineering department so that the exact problem will be more obvious to users. Hope that helps. -- Brett Carr Ripe Network Coordination Centre System Engineer -- Operations Group Singel 258 Amsterdam NL http://www.ripe.net +31 627 546046 GPG Key fingerprint = F20D B2A7 C91D E370 44CF F244 B6A1 EF48 E743 F7D8 From trudy at ripe.net Thu Mar 30 14:27:54 2006 From: trudy at ripe.net (Trudy Prins) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 14:27:54 +0200 Subject: [db-wg] mirroring connections with Whois Database enabled In-Reply-To: <4427F048.50706@ripe.net> References: <4427CC17.6040106@ripe.net> <4427F048.50706@ripe.net> Message-ID: <442BCECA.4050607@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, We have enabled the mirroring process for all of our external sources, except for: APNIC:2:Y:1710606-1949350 This mirroring connection was causing our update server to crash, and so we temporarily disabled it. We intend to enable this mirroring connection as soon as it is safe to do so. We apologise for the inconvenience. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this issue, please contact ripe-dbm at ripe.net. Regards, Trudy Prins RIPE Database Administration From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Thu Mar 30 17:22:05 2006 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 16:22:05 +0100 Subject: [db-wg] Call for agenda items, DB-WG Meeting during RIPE52, Istabul Message-ID: <442BF79D.5050902@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Dear DB-WG folks, the RIPE NCC has asked us to submit the draft agendas for the WGs by mid April. Thus, please submit (to the WG list or to me personally) your item requests or suggest topics for discussion to be included in the draft agenda. The DataBase-WG meeting is scheduled for Friday morning, April 28. The overall RIPE meeting outline is available at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-52/meeting-plan.html The list of plenary presentations scheduled is available at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-52/presentations/ See you in Istanbul, Wilfried. From md at Linux.IT Fri Mar 31 12:02:16 2006 From: md at Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:02:16 +0200 Subject: [db-wg] WG action 48.6 Message-ID: <20060331100216.GB5873@wonderland.linux.it> http://www.ripe.de/ripe/wg/db/minutes/ripe-51.html says: 48.6 RIPE NCC To change DB behaviour to return IRT object [Misunderstanding of requirement, superceded by AP51.8, complete] Can somebody explain this? I tought that everybody agreed that it would be a good idea to always return IRT records for inetnum/inetnum queries, but this is still not happening. I could not find action 51.8 in the draft minutes of the AP WG. -- ciao, Marco From denis at ripe.net Fri Mar 31 12:06:32 2006 From: denis at ripe.net (Denis Walker) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:06:32 +0200 Subject: [db-wg] WG action 48.6 In-Reply-To: <20060331100216.GB5873@wonderland.linux.it> References: <20060331100216.GB5873@wonderland.linux.it> Message-ID: <442CFF28.8010903@ripe.net> Hi Marco I am working on this as we speak. The code changes have been done and I am in the testing phase. I expect it to be in production next week. regards denis RIPE NCC Software Engineering Department Marco d'Itri wrote: >http://www.ripe.de/ripe/wg/db/minutes/ripe-51.html says: > >48.6 RIPE NCC To change DB behaviour to return IRT object > [Misunderstanding of requirement, superceded by > AP51.8, complete] > >Can somebody explain this? I tought that everybody agreed that it would >be a good idea to always return IRT records for inetnum/inetnum queries, >but this is still not happening. > >I could not find action 51.8 in the draft minutes of the AP WG. > > >