Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:55:20 +0800 To: brian@meganet.net From: "David R. Conrad" <davidc@apnic.net> Subject: Re: small vent
One reason might be that clueless folk in the US that complain to APNIC or RIPE (or NANOG) directly instead of looking stuff up in the appropriate whois database ("ARIN has all the IP information, right?") and complaining to the people who can actually do something about the problem. [...]
Having to specify the proper database host on the whois command always struck me a bit like requiring every user to specify the appropriate server for, e.g. ".com", every time the user makes a DNS request. Why can't the registry folks get their collective act together and provide users with a system that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate [piece] of the database. -tjs
Why can't the registry folks get their collective act together and provide users with a system that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate [piece] of the database.
Makes too much sense to be allowed. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Tim Salo wrote:
Why can't the registry folks get their collective act together and provide users with a system that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate [piece] of the database.
Why can't the ISPs get their act together and use a whois client that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate database? This is simple enough that it could be done with a PERL script frontend to the regular whois client and as an added bonus it could lookup info in the country-code TLD databases as well. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com
Why can't the registry folks get their collective act together and provide users with a system that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate [piece] of the database.
Why can't the ISPs get their act together and use a whois client that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate database? This is simple enough that it could be done with a PERL script frontend to the regular whois client and as an added bonus it could lookup info in the country-code TLD databases as well.
If people used a WKS RR for whois in reverse and forward DNS this would solve this problem with a very small client hack, and allow for future changes throughout both the namespace and IP hierachy. -- Alex Bligh GX Networks (formerly Xara Networks)
[ On Sat, June 27, 1998 at 10:11:54 (-0700), Michael Dillon wrote: ]
Subject: Re: small vent
Why can't the ISPs get their act together and use a whois client that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate database? This is simple enough that it could be done with a PERL script frontend to the regular whois client and as an added bonus it could lookup info in the country-code TLD databases as well.
Perl shmerl (though as you'll see below shell scripts still don't have very good facilities for dealing with inet numbers): (this isn't internationalized, yet; apologies to non-English speakers) ---------- cut here ---------- #! /bin/sh : # # awhois - all-encompassing whois client wrapper.... # # (c) Copyright 1998 Greg A. Woods. # Freely redistibutable. # All other rights reserved. # Return all fixes/modifications to <woods@planix.com>. # #ident "@(#)LOCAL:awhois.sh 1.8 98/05/02 22:07:14 (woods)" #ident "@(#)awhois:$Name$:$Id$" argv0=`basename $0` DEFAULTWHOISHOST="whois.internic.net" USAGE="Usage: $argv0 [-h whois-host] query-string" HELP="$USAGE -h host query the specified host. The appropriate whois server will be chosen based on the query-string given, so long as it is recognized as a handle, host, domain, network, AS number, etc. If the query-string doesn't match an appropriate pattern the default server ($DEFAULTWHOISHOST) will be queried. " WHOISHOST="" while getopts "h:H" OPTCHAR ; do case $OPTCHAR in h) WHOISHOST=$OPTARG ;; h) echo "$HELP" 1>&2 exit 2 ;; \?) echo "$USAGE" 1>&2 exit 2 ;; esac done shift `expr $OPTIND - 1` QUERY="$*" if [ -n "$WHOISHOST" ] ; then exec whois -h $WHOISHOST "$QUERY" fi case "$QUERY" in # mostly derived from "whois -h whois.arin.net European" 62.*|163.12[89].*|163.1[3][0-9].*|163.14[0-3].*|164.40.*|171.1[6-9].*|171.2[0-9].*|171.3[0-3].*|192.162.*|192.16[4-7].*|19[3-5].*) exec whois -h whois.ripe.net "$QUERY" ;; # mostly derived from "whois -h whois.arin.net Asia" 61.*|169.20[89].*|169.21[0-9].*|169.22[0-3].*|20[23].*|21[01].*) exec whois -h whois.apnic.net "$QUERY" ;; # This is a bit of a quick&dirty hack. # ARIN's info for this (under NETBLK-SEED-NETS) says: 192.72.3.0 - 192.72.252.0 192.72.*) exec whois -h whois.iii.org.tw "$QUERY" ;; # the rest of the IP numbers, AS numbers, ARIN handle patterns, ... [1-9].*|[1-9][0-9].*|[12][0-9][0-9].*|[0-9]|[0-9][0-9]|[0-9][0-9][0-9]|[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]|[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]|*-arin|*-ARIN|net-*|NET-*|netblk-*|NETBLK-*|asn-*|ASN-*) exec whois -h whois.arin.net "$QUERY" ;; *.com|*.org|*.edu|*.net|*-DOM|*-dom|*-ORG|*-org) exec whois -h whois.internic.net "$QUERY" ;; *.mil) exec whois -h nic.ddn.mil "$QUERY" ;; *.at) exec whois -h whois.univie.ac.at "$QUERY" ;; *.au) exec whois -h whois.aunic.net "$QUERY" ;; *.ca) exec whois -h whois.cdnnet.ca "$QUERY" ;; *.ch) exec whois -h whois.nic.ch "$QUERY" ;; *.de) exec whois -h whois.nic.de "$QUERY" ;; *.fr) exec whois -h whois.nic.fr "$QUERY" ;; *.it) exec whois -h whois.nis.garr.it "$QUERY" ;; *.kr) exec whois -h whois.krnic.net "$QUERY" ;; *.jp) exec whois -h whois.nic.ad.jp "$QUERY/e" ;; *.mx) exec whois -h nic.mx "$QUERY" ;; *.nl) exec whois -h www.domain-registry.nl "$QUERY" ;; *.pk) exec whois -h whois.pknic.net.pk "$QUERY" ;; *.se) exec whois -h whois.sunet.se "$QUERY" ;; *.sg) exec whois -h whois.nic.net.sg "$QUERY" ;; *.th) exec whois -h whois.thnic.net "$QUERY" ;; *.com.tw) exec whois -h whois.iii.org.tw "$QUERY" ;; *.tw) exec whois -h whois.twnic.net "$QUERY" ;; *.ac.uk) exec whois -h whois.ja.net "$QUERY" ;; *.co.uk|*.org.uk|*.net.uk|*.plc.uk|*.gov.uk|*.net.uk) exec whois -h whois.nic.uk "$QUERY" ;; [a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z][0-9]*|[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z][0-9]*) exec whois -h whois.internic.net "$QUERY" ;; esac echo "Warning: '$argv0' knows not which whois server to talk to for '$QUERY'." 1>&2 exec whois -h $DEFAULTWHOISHOST "$QUERY" ---------- end here ---------- -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
[ On Sat, June 27, 1998 at 14:12:48 (-0400), I wrote: ]
Subject: Re: small vent
#ident "@(#)LOCAL:awhois.sh 1.8 98/05/02 22:07:14 (woods)"
BTW, New versions of this script will always be at: ftp://ftp.planix.com/pub/Planix/awhois.sh (recent updates mailed to me have already been incorporated.... Thanks!) -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Michael Dillon wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Tim Salo wrote:
Why can't the registry folks get their collective act together and provide users with a system that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate [piece] of the database.
Why can't the ISPs get their act together and use a whois client that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate database?
Possibly because that would be a backwards way to approach to the issue. What you propose would require that every person running a machine that has a version of whois install this new version of whois, rather than handling it intelligently at the registry level which would require no action on the part of the hundreds of thousands of machines out there. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell (800) 299-1288 v Systems Administrator (925) 377-1414 f NameSecure \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
Why can't the ISPs get their act together and use a whois client that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate database?
Possibly because that would be a backwards way to approach to the issue. What you propose would require that every person running a machine that has a version of whois install this new version of whois, rather than handling it intelligently at the registry level which would require no action on the part of the hundreds of thousands of machines out there.
I believe in distributed intelligence rather than making everyone rely on a single central point of failure. If the default registry compiled into your whois client fails then you can no longer reach any registry database at all whereas an intelligent client would still be able to reach most databases. There is also the problem that the default registry in most whois clients is the Internic run by NSI and the management of that company has shown themselves time and time again to be utterly clueless about these kinds of issues. I don't hold out much hope that pleading on hands and knees with the royal Internic will lead to them implementing a whois proxy service. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com
Michael Dillon writes:
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
handling it intelligently at the registry level which would require no action on the part of the hundreds of thousands of machines out there.
I believe in distributed intelligence rather than making everyone rely on a single central point of failure.
[They do anyway, but I agree there's no reason to compound the problem.] How about a little of both ... Oh yeah, that's rwhois. Too bad its not getting much attention.
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Michael Dillon wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
Why can't the ISPs get their act together and use a whois client that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate database?
Possibly because that would be a backwards way to approach to the issue. What you propose would require that every person running a machine that has a version of whois install this new version of whois, rather than handling it intelligently at the registry level which would require no action on the part of the hundreds of thousands of machines out there.
I believe in distributed intelligence rather than making everyone rely on a single central point of failure.
First off, the whois database *is* a single point of failure for all intents and purposes. There is no "distributed intelligence" contained within. Rwhois fits the distributed intelligence model much more closely.
If the default registry compiled into your whois client fails then you can no longer reach any registry database at all whereas an intelligent client would still be able to reach most databases.
And again, this can be handled intelligently at the registry level. It's not like none of us have ever seen a proxy server. :-) Also, all these splits have come "after the fact." How many more will occur? Should we all run out and grab a new whois client every time a change occurs? And really, why should this be necessary?
There is also the problem that the default registry in most whois clients is the Internic run by NSI and the management of that company has shown themselves time and time again to be utterly clueless about these kinds of issues.
Well, there is one thing I won't argue about. I could however tell you about my experience with ARIN a little over a month ago and how it took being transferred 5 times before I got to someone that knew what I was talking about when I said "arin.net is not resolving" but I'll spare you.
I don't hold out much hope that pleading on hands and knees with the royal Internic will lead to them implementing a whois proxy service.
I don't think that it will be up to NSI in a few months. The point I believe the original poster was making, and one that I agree with is that it is quite possible to make all these internal issues and changes transparent to the end user by some simple coordination by the various number registries. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell (800) 299-1288 v Systems Administrator (925) 377-1414 f NameSecure \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Tim,
Having to specify the proper database host on the whois command always struck me a bit like requiring every user to specify the appropriate server for, e.g. ".com", every time the user makes a DNS request.
I agree.
Why can't the registry folks get their collective act together and provide users with a system that allows a simple request like "whois name" to find the appropriate [piece] of the database.
There have been many discussions along similar lines, all come to nothing. It would not appear to be a high priority. Hopefully, this will change in the near future. Regards, -drc
participants (8)
-
Alex Bligh -
David Lesher -
David R. Conrad -
Mark Milhollan -
Michael Dillon -
Patrick Greenwell -
Tim Salo -
woods＠most.weird.com