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/db-wg@ripe.net/
[db-wg] New NWI for geofeed?
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] New NWI for geofeed?
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] New NWI for geofeed?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
denis walker
ripedenis at gmail.com
Wed Apr 7 04:29:43 CEST 2021
HI Massimo I just checked the numbers Ed gave me and I misread the message. These are the numbers of objects with a "geoloc:" attribute not geofeed :( cheers denis co-chair DB-WG On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 at 02:56, Massimo Candela <massimo at us.ntt.net> wrote: > > Hi Denis, > > > On 07/04/2021 02:02, denis walker wrote: > > Your data does not match the data I got from the RIPE NCC... > > > > From the RIPE NCC: > > > > Currently there are 24,408 INETNUM and 516,354 INET6NUM objects > > containing a "remarks: geofeed: url" attribute in the database. These > > have 7,731 distinct values in the INETNUMs and 1,045 distinct values > > in the INET6NUMs. > > > I cannot reproduce what you did. > Even if I just "grep -i geofeed" in ripe.db.inetnum.gz from the ripe ncc > ftp [1], I obtain only 132 items. And 39 in ripe.db.inet6num.gz. The > same if I use the complete dump [2]. > > Is the data in the FTP wrong? Am I doing something wrong? > > Ciao, > Massimo > > [1] https://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/split/ > [2] https://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/ripe.db.gz
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] New NWI for geofeed?
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] New NWI for geofeed?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]