[db-wg] created: field value

In message <CAPfiqjaqD1-q_O=3pNzq9qt0Y-8-bjhC3ejJn59Lzpj-S7doHw at mail.gmail.com>, 
Leo Vegoda <leo at vegoda.org> wrote:

>On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg
><db-wg at ripe.net> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> All I meant was that I was "suspicious" that the created: date/time value could
>> be, you know, wrong... which it self-evidently is.
>
>And there lies the value. Within the constraints of the format, the
>RIPE NCC alerted you that additional questions were required. You
>asked them and got decent answers. I think everyone's a winner here.

OK, well, two points:

1)  In my sometimes humble opinion, it is suboptimal to have bogus created: values
in the public WHOIS records.  And my opinion on this point is irrespective of
whether the bogus values have been placed there deliberately or accidentally.

Furthermore, although the date 01 Jan 1970 has unambiguous significance to me
personally... because I've been doing work on *NIX systems for, give or take, the
past 40 years... I am not persuaded that every single person who might view the
public WHOIS record for the 138.201.0.0/16 object would be so instantly aware
of the significance or essential bogosity of that specific value.

In short, it's likely confusing for the average man-on-the-street observer.

And it isn't as if the job of putting some more meaningful and relevant date/time
stamp into the record in this case would be in the least bit difficult.  The
RIPE WHOIS already contains an ostensibly full history of the registration of
this block, and that history quite evidently dates the registration of the block
to exactly 2015-09-23 15:10.

If there is a reason why 1970-01-01 is, in this instance, a more appropriate value
to have in the created: field for this object, as opposed to 2015-09-23, then I am
eager to have someone explain that to me.

2) Whereas the created: date/time stamp for the 138.201.0.0/16 object may perhaps
be in some sense forgivable, given that it is so self-evidently wrong... at least
for anyone with even minimal exposure to *NIX systems... I remain rather entirely
perplexed about the created: field values for the 51.155.0.0/16 and 162.55.0.0/16
objects, both of which, as I also noted here yesterday, are clearly marked as
"status: LEGACY".

Were "LEGACY" allocations still being created as recently as 2015-09-23 and
2019-11-18, respectively?  If so, that is certainly news to me, as I suspect
it may be also to others.

When were the 51.155.0.0/16 and 162.55.0.0/16 blocks actually first registered,
either specifically with RIPE or with *any* RIR?  And why aren't those original
registration dates shown in the respective created: fields for these objects?

Forgive me, but it is beginning to appear that I can entirely do away with my local
/dev/random device and henceforth just draw as many random numbers as I may need
from RIPE WHOIS created: field values.

Again, in my humble opinion, this is rather evidently suboptimal.


Regards,
rfg