- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Need RWhois help.
by Dean Robb 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

At 17:39 3/10/99 +0000, you wrote: >Greetings, > >We're trying to get a RWhois server online, and are pretty well at a >dead-end. > >I've searched high and low, but can't find any FAQ's on RWhois servers. >Can anyone point me in the right direction here? > >We've found the RWhois mailing lists, and have subscribed to those, but if >there are any other resources out there I'd like to know about them. NSI is *supposed* to be spearheading the RWhoIs effort, they *should* be helpful. "Small minds can only contemplate small ideas".....Unknown Dean Robb Owner, PC-EASY (757) 495-EASY [3279] On-site computer repair, upgrades and consultations Read my game reviews/columns in SimOps on WWW.TheGamers.Net

2 2

Re: [NIC-990226.52da] Suggestion: Add contact entry to whois
by owen＠dixon.DeLong.SJ.CA.US 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

Well, I, and many other people on NANOG where this has been discussed over the last several weeks would tend to disagree with you. While your answer certainly reflects the current state of the database, it appears that you may not have understood the intent of the message. I am suggesting that it may be time to consider the addition of those fields as a change. I wanted to solicit input from InterNIC and ARIN, as well as NANOG. At this point, I will probably attempt to put it through the RFC process. The idea seemed to have substantial support from the community. There were some voices of dissent, but most of them revolved around the fact that it didn't solve all the problems or didn't solve certain problems it wasn't intended to solve. There was one voice opposed on the basis that all contact information for domains should be private, but this opinion doesn't appear to be widely represented among the community. Owen > > > Dear Customer, > > Thank you for contacting Network Solutions, Inc., InterNIC > Registration Services. > > Please be advised, unfortunately three contacts are all that needed. > > > Best Regards, > Ed r > Network Solutions, Inc. > > World Wide Web: http://rs.internic.net > E-mail: hostmaster(a)internic.net > Phone: 703-742-4777(Monday-Friday 7:00am to 9:00pm Eastern Time) > Billing Fax: 703-318-9125 > Regular Fax: 703-742-9552(For Modification & Delete Authorization) > Postal: Network Solutions, Inc. > ATTN: InterNIC > 505 Huntmar Park Drive > Herndon, VA 20170 > Tax ID #: 52-1146119 crg 11/02/98 > nsi_rp112 > ========================================================================== > > > > > > > We already have Admin, Tech, and Billing. Would it be possible to consider > > the addition of an Abuse contact in whois? > > > > Owen > >

1 0

secondary dns
by Steven J. Sobol 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

I'm looking for someone to do secondary DNS for some domains that I host. Preferably this person should not be connected directly to any of the backbones I'm connected to. I will, of course, be happy to return the favor. Thanks. -- Steve Sobol sjsobol(a)nacs.net (AKA support(a)nacs.net and abuse(a)nacs.net) "The world is headed for mutiny/When all we want is unity" --Creed, "One"

1 0

InterNIC - We put the "I" in incompetent.
by John Fraizer 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

Hello boys and girls. The time is now 0800 EST and of course, whois is still screwed. [rs.internic.net] Registrant: EnterZone.Net (ENTERZONE2-DOM) 604 East Rich Street Columbus, OH 43215 US Domain Name: ENTERZONE.NET Record last updated on 09-May-97. Database last updated on 13-Mar-99 23:57:32 EST. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5 NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6 The InterNIC Registration Services database contains ONLY non-military and non-US Government Domains and contacts. Other associated whois servers: American Registry for Internet Numbers - whois.arin.net European IP Address Allocations - whois.ripe.net Asia Pacific IP Address Allocations - whois.apnic.net US Military - whois.nic.mil US Government - whois.nic.gov Lets see... Where do we begin... 1) They lost the data from our update. >From: Domain Registration Role Account <domreg(a)internic.net> >Message-Id: <199903121048.FAA03704(a)mts2.internic.net> >Subject: Re: [NIC-990310.2ebf] ENTERZONE.NET >Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 05:48:48 -0500 (EST) >Reply-To: domreg(a)internic.net >To: John.Fraizer(a)EnterZone.Net >X-Mailer: fastmail [version 2.4 PL24alpha4] >X-UIDL: e1f57853ffcc7b0ad65532566d6484df > >The updates, of the domain name shown below, have been completed. If you >wish to make changes to this domain in the future, please submit a Domain >Name Registration Agreement to: > > HOSTMASTER(a)INTERNIC.NET > >Please write "modify" on line 0a. > >All requests completed before 19:00 Eastern time will be included in the >root server update. The root zone files are updated 7 days a week. These >changes should be visible in our Whois database the following day. > >If you wish to make changes to the domain record, contact record, host >record or the registrant name, please use the following URL to complete >the proper form: > > http://rs.internic.net/help/templates.html > >Network Solutions is not an agent or representative of your Internet >Service Provider, web-hosting company, or other organizations with which >you have contracted for Internet-related services. This change to your >domain name record does not amend, modify, or otherwise affect the terms >and conditions of any agreement(s) you may have with third parties. > >Network Solutions, Inc. >E-mail: hostmaster(a)internic.net >Phone: 703-742-4777(Monday-Friday 7:00am to 9:00pm Eastern Time) >Fax: 703-742-9552 >================================================================ > > >EnterZone.Net (ENTERZONE2-DOM) > 6227 Headley Road > Gahanna, OH 43230 > US > > Domain Name: ENTERZONE.NET > > Administrative Contact: > Fraizer, John (JF1998) John.Fraizer(a)ENTERZONE.NET > +1 614 316-2708 > Technical Contact: > Network Operations Center (NOC179-ORG) noc(a)ENTERZONE.NET > +1 614 316-2708 > Billing Contact: > Network Operations Center (NOC179-ORG) noc(a)ENTERZONE.NET > +1 614 316-2708 > > Record last updated on 12-Mar-99. > Domain servers in listed order: > > NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5 > NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6 > >========================================================================= Why do any of even take the time to keep our records up to date when they just go lose them, corrupt them, ignore them? 2) They took the POC information out of the display both from rwhois and telnet. Just how are we supposed to find the POCs for a domain now? 3) They are causing service effecting outages with NO NOTICE to US, their customers. This is getting real %^&*# old, real %^*# fast. I wish they would start spending my $35/yr per domain on clue. ------------------------------------------------------------------ ML.ORG is gone. Check out http://www.EZ-IP.Net - It's *FREE* ------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your *FREE* Parked Domain account at http://www.EZ-Hosting.Com ------------------------------------------------------------------ John Fraizer | __ _ | The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation PGP Key fingerprint = 7DB6 1CA2 DAA6 43DA 3AAF 44CD 258C 3D7E B425 81A8

13 19

Re: RE:Whois Internic Toast
by Vadim Antonov 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

>> Can I please have a new Domain Provider !!!! >we will all get what we deserve. I always had an opinion that backbone ISPs should form a consortium and take over the domain mess. They have a pretty good track record of getting contentious issues resolved in a rational and workable manner. Actually, CIX seems to be well-positioned to do exactly that. Now, telcos have way too many lawyers who are loath to work a little too harder to be on the right side of the Sherman Act, but i suspect their ISP departments by now feel the pain - how many customers bother their help desks to get their DNS issues resolved? --vadim

1 0

routing registries question
by hhui＠arcfour.com 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

naive question: I just noticed that ARIN has a routing registry and was wondering what that does for me. I notice it doesn't mirror RADB very well. does it supercede IRR/RADB or is it just another fun tool? (this is not a political question) -h

2 1

Re: InterNIC - We put the "I" in incompetent.
by George Herbert 14 Mar '99

14 Mar '99

Michael Dillon <michael(a)memra.com> wrote: >On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, I Am Not An Isp wrote: >> >> NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5 >> >> NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6 >> > >> >Hmm... same subnet... >> >> Michael, you should know better than that. I do not see a subnet mask on >> these IP addresses. There is nothing stopping a Network Operator from >> making these /32s and putting them on different networks. > >Nothing except community consensus that it is a *BAD* thing to pollute the >global routing table with lots of long prefixes. Could be internally divided within a single external announcement from one AS. However, I think we all know this is nitpicking and the odds that these systems are further apart than about 20 feet approach zero. -george william herbert gherbert(a)crl.com

1 0

internic fwiw
by Jared Mauch 14 Mar '99

14 Mar '99

I just watched a domain reg go through for something hosted on my dns servers. follow-up to /dev/null or your local bit repositry. -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.

1 0

sorry about that
by Becki Kain 14 Mar '99

14 Mar '99

someone else (ie: not me) decided to register furph for internic.net and yes, the internic refused the request, stating that it was already registered. Becki Kain beckers(a)furph.com -- furph, Inc. WWW/Unix/Windows Solutions 734-513-7763 (voice) info(a)furph.com http://www.furph.com 734-513-7759 (FAX)

1 0

Re: need i say more?
by mark＠vielle.datasys.net 14 Mar '99

14 Mar '99

: "melinda b. thompson" wrote: : > : > No match for "INTERNIC.NET". : : Makes me feel marginally better about several of my domains not being : located today. Gotta wonder... Gee, people: the root name servers still look good, right? As long as these changes don't get propogated and the NIC comes back up soon, nobody's going to get hurt. Sure, it's annoying; but for valid domains with running DNS and accurate SOAs, we still have a working DNS, and we still have POCs (given in the SOA). Am I wrong? --- Mark R. Lindsey, mark(a)datasys.net Internet Engineering, DSS Online

2 1