Hi Dana when you talk about DNS walking is this similar to the concept of SNMP Walking? Mufti Nayeem Ahmed Network Systems Engineer Market Data Networks Reuters America Inc. (212)-603-3595 1-800-2REUTER To: Mark Borchers <markb@infi.net>, Mark Prior <mrp@connect.com.au> cc: nanog@merit.edu (bcc: Mufti Ahmed/NYC/US/Reuters) Subject: Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering I plan to write a WHOIS client for the RA in Perl as part of Net::Whois. I also plan to have a program that will walk the RA for a given AS (which is why I need the whois client). Eventually I also plan to add ARIN support to Net::Whois I'd like to see a DNS walk to compare the registry to what's out there. Not to mention finding all the bogus records that do things like list ENGLAND as a country code (instead of UK). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Prior" <mrp@connect.com.au> To: "Mark Borchers" <markb@infi.net> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 3:05 AM Subject: Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering
Are there any plans to correlate route registry objects against address registry databases?
I believe that one of the roots of this thread is the need to validate the legitimacy of not only routes, but registered route objects. Although it is too much to expect that route objects will match up cleanly with address block assignments at the outset, performing such a correlation would at least identify the scope of the problem.
It's not all that simple to do, although certainly some of the trash could be deleted, since it's not always the organisation "owning" the address space that announces it. Some process that compares the IR registry view to the current routing table view might be "better" but who would take on that task and under what mandate as its one thing to find the problems but it's an entirely different problem to actually fix it?
Mark.
----------------------------------------------------------------- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd.