I've not heard anything from the InterNIC in recent days - forms submitted via their web page aren't resulting in forms in my inbox anymore. Has anyone else noticed a distinct lack of InterNIC mail lately? The last time I got anything from them was 15.45 on 2/28/98. Hmmm.. now that I think of it, I haven't seen any recent NANOG postings in a while - not since the "Halon-protected colo space available" posting on 3/1/98, at 21.12. I've received other mail, but these two sources have been noticeably quiet. We'll see what this posting does. Thanks for any insight! -Pete Pete Murray - FASTNET(tm) / You Tools Corporation
pete@fast.net (610) 954-5200 - http://www.fast.net FASTNET - Business and Personal Internet Solutions
On Tue, Mar 03, 1998 at 12:19:20PM -0500, Peter Murray wrote:
I've not heard anything from the InterNIC in recent days - forms submitted via their web page aren't resulting in forms in my inbox anymore. Has anyone else noticed a distinct lack of InterNIC mail lately? The last time I got anything from them was 15.45 on 2/28/98.
Today (3/3), I submitted two new registrations and got back messages an hour later that the work had been done. I also submitted a change form for a DNS host, and they apparently give that lower priority because it's been two days and I haven't gotten the confirmation request yet; but I have received the notice "Changes must be submitted by a domain contact", etc., and mods always take a bit longer than new registrations anyhow. Whois, of course, is broken more often than it's working. -- Steve Sobol, NACS.NET Technical Support [http://www.nacs.net/support] sjsobol@nacs.net/sjsobol@nstc.com/sjsobol@apk.net Moderator, alt.religion.afterburner [http://antispam.nstc.com/ara] SPAM(tm) belongs in a can, not on a mail server.
I've noticed that domain modifications have taken an abnormally long time to process as of late. Automagically generated mail seems to flow properly, at least for me. -=asr On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Peter Murray wrote:
I've not heard anything from the InterNIC in recent days - forms submitted via their web page aren't resulting in forms in my inbox anymore. Has anyone else noticed a distinct lack of InterNIC mail lately? The last time I got anything from them was 15.45 on 2/28/98.
Hmmm.. now that I think of it, I haven't seen any recent NANOG postings in a while - not since the "Halon-protected colo space available" posting on 3/1/98, at 21.12. I've received other mail, but these two sources have been noticeably quiet. We'll see what this posting does.
Thanks for any insight!
-Pete
Pete Murray - FASTNET(tm) / You Tools Corporation
pete@fast.net (610) 954-5200 - http://www.fast.net FASTNET - Business and Personal Internet Solutions
On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Adam Rothschild wrote:
I've noticed that domain modifications have taken an abnormally long time to process as of late. Automagically generated mail seems to flow properly, at least for me.
Not just abnormally long, but a wierd kind of backwards. ;-) We're running an automated "InterNIC Manager" that I whipped up over here, and I'm constantly being told about ACKs that we receive hours after the domain has already gone through. ;-) Been happening since I wrote the system, but it's happening with alarming regularity since their troubles with splitting whois services off for ARIN (regularity meaning that almost -every- submission is going through, and then I'm getting the initial ACK ;-). Have they started prioritizing their outbound email? Another question, sort of related...why aren't ARIN and InterNIC doing referral whois back and forth? You'd think it would be relatively simple to just proxy the unknown requests to the other 'big' whois agencies (ARIN, RIPE, etc)... -- -------------------. emarshal at logic.net .--------------------------------- Edward S. Marshall `-----------------------' http://www.logic.net/~emarshal/ Spammers: Please email my blacklisting service at "spam@logic.net".
<emarshal@logic.net> wrote:
Another question, sort of related...why aren't ARIN and InterNIC doing referral whois back and forth?
I don't know. Use root.rwhois.net instead. Now if I could just find where they've hidden the V1.5 client my queries wouldn't look so ugly ... Connecting to [root.rwhois.net] port [4321] -> config file server Connnection made to root.rwhois.net port 4321 connection took 0.00 second RWhois Server at root.rwhois.net version V-1.5:003eff:00 Sending [RWhois V-1.0 (InterNIC V-1.0BETA5)] instruction to the server <ERROR> Client and server version incompatible (At that my 1.0BETA9.2 client is patched, otherwise it waits many seconds before declaring that the server doesn't appear to be an RWhois server.) The patches I've applied to 1.0BETA9.2 are: (the waitresult.c patch is crap, but it makes the client work better for me, YMMV) --- client/waitresult.c.old Wed Sep 25 16:34:32 1996 +++ client/waitresult.c Wed Mar 4 04:49:54 1998 @@ -157,7 +157,8 @@ /* first determine that it is an RWhois server */ - if(!strncmp( retline, "%RWhois", 7)) + if(!strncmp( retline, "%RWhois", 7) + || !strncmp( retline, "%rwhois", 7)) { @@ -172,8 +173,9 @@ if( verbose ) printf("\nRWhois Server ... can't id version will continue"); - sprintf( outbuffer, "RWhois V-%s (InterNIC V-%s)", - SPEC_VERSION, IMP_VERSION); + /* sprintf( outbuffer, "RWhois V-%s (InterNIC V-%s)", + SPEC_VERSION, IMP_VERSION); */ + sprintf( outbuffer, "holdconnect on"); send_command( outbuffer); control_pannel[CP_PROMPT] = SET_WAIT; --- client/procargs.c.old Tue Sep 24 14:16:04 1996 +++ client/procargs.c Wed Mar 4 04:49:54 1998 @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ tmpline[0] = NullCH; + if( argv) while( *argv) { upper( *argv); --- client/procrc.c.old Mon Jul 8 13:17:23 1996 +++ client/procrc.c Wed Mar 4 04:49:54 1998 @@ -38,8 +38,8 @@ char *cfile; { FILE *fp; -char temp[MAXLINE]; -char cmd[10], act[80], act1[80]; +char temp[MAXBUFF]; +char cmd[MAXLINE], act[MAXLINE], act1[MAXLINE]; int servnum = 0; int limit; char line[MAXLINE]; @@ -207,6 +207,7 @@ } else if(!strncmp( cmd, "FORWARD", 7)) { + upper( act); if(!strncmp( act, "ON", 2)) { default_forward = FORWARD_ON; --- common/misc.c.old Wed Aug 7 13:48:21 1996 +++ common/misc.c Wed Mar 4 04:49:54 1998 @@ -380,12 +380,18 @@ char *program; char *param; { +#ifndef __linux__ int errno = 0; +#endif extern char **environ; char *myenviron[MAX_SET]; char *argv[MAX_SET]; char buf[MAX_LINE]; int i, pid; + +#ifdef __linux__ + errno = 0; +#endif signal(SIGINT, SIG_IGN); signal(SIGQUIT, SIG_IGN);
participants (5)
-
Adam Rothschild -
Edward S. Marshall -
Mark Milhollan -
Peter Murray -
Steve Sobol