Greetings. With the recent and only somewhat confirmed removal of POC information from the Internic Whois database, and the upcoming set of newcomers to the field, will we perhaps see a return or rise to popularity of RP dns records? Having your nameserver be able to dole out contact information for your domains, site, and hosts is a nice alternative to having no source of this information. Unfortunately, if your nameserver(s) are down when someone is trying to contact you, the effort is futile. The two biggest things that made whois useful in locating contact information were that EVERY domain in the Internic-controlled TLD's had contact information in Whois by requirement of Internic- and the database somewhat centralized. There were multiple whois servers with all the information, and you were usually able to obtain that information even if network connectivity to a site was down. As whois becomes less and less useful, we may find ourselves seeking sanity in RP records. Unfortunately, it would appear that this is a mediocre solution at best. file this one under thoughts, random. -jeff Jeff Godin Network Specialist Traverse Area District Library / Traverse Community Network jeff@tcnet.org - 616/932-8546 voice
(jump to end, POC info is still in whois) Yes, POC of information in dns, soa records, etc.. is useful. Problem is severe lack of clue with people running dns. This can not be easily fixed. ex: query(139.221.36.200.in-addr.arpa) All possible A RR's lame query(14.0.208.209.in-addr.arpa) All possible A RR's lame query(142.105.230.200.in-addr.arpa) All possible A RR's lame query(152.104.230.200.in-addr.arpa) All possible A RR's lame query(5.241.226.207.in-addr.arpa) All possible A RR's lame query(78.254.185.209.in-addr.arpa) All possible A RR's lame query(TN-56K-1.tamnet.com.mx) All possible A RR's lame query(TN-56K-172.tamnet.com.mx) All possible A RR's lame query(TN-56K-173.tamnet.com.mx) All possible A RR's lame query(cajunemail.com) All possible A RR's lame query(gate7.olympiakos.com) All possible A RR's lame query(geocites.com) All possible A RR's lame query(hotmail.net) All possible A RR's lame query(mail.hotmail.net) All possible A RR's lame query(worldnet.com) All possible A RR's lame query(writeme.net) All possible A RR's lame /sigh Registrant: Nether Network (NETHER-DOM) 2738 Eastlawn Ypsilanti, MI 48197 US Domain Name: NETHER.NET Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Mauch, Jared (JM568) jared@PUCK.NETHER.NET +1 216 902 5460x2634 (FAX) +1 734 332 7947 Billing Contact: Mauch, Jared (JM568) jared@PUCK.NETHER.NET +1 216 902 5460x2634 (FAX) +1 734 332 7947 Record last updated on 21-Jan-99. Database last updated on 14-Mar-99 09:13:23 EST. Domain servers in listed order: PUCK.NETHER.NET 204.42.254.5 THORN.BLACKROSE.ORG 204.212.44.2 SECONDARY.DNS.IAGNET.NET 131.103.1.101 On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 01:06:29PM -0500, Jeff wrote:
Greetings.
With the recent and only somewhat confirmed removal of POC information from the Internic Whois database, and the upcoming set of newcomers to the field, will we perhaps see a return or rise to popularity of RP dns records?
Having your nameserver be able to dole out contact information for your domains, site, and hosts is a nice alternative to having no source of this information. Unfortunately, if your nameserver(s) are down when someone is trying to contact you, the effort is futile.
The two biggest things that made whois useful in locating contact information were that EVERY domain in the Internic-controlled TLD's had contact information in Whois by requirement of Internic- and the database somewhat centralized. There were multiple whois servers with all the information, and you were usually able to obtain that information even if network connectivity to a site was down.
As whois becomes less and less useful, we may find ourselves seeking sanity in RP records. Unfortunately, it would appear that this is a mediocre solution at best.
file this one under thoughts, random.
-jeff
Jeff Godin Network Specialist Traverse Area District Library / Traverse Community Network jeff@tcnet.org - 616/932-8546 voice
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Jared Mauch wrote:
(jump to end, POC info is still in whois)
Aha. As I had stated, the removal was only "somewhat confirmed". Perhaps I was a bit premature in my thoughts. :)
Yes, POC of information in dns, soa records, etc.. is useful.
Problem is severe lack of clue with people running dns. This can not be easily fixed.
Indeed. That is why Whois is so useful. It more-or-less requires that each domain have contact information in a proper form, etc. I'm not sure how I feel about the Clueless NIC leading the Clueless users, though... -jeff Jeff Godin Network Specialist Traverse Area District Library / Traverse Community Network jeff@tcnet.org - 616/932-8546 voice
segue appears to be the problem. Right before the batch o'dupes, I got half a dozen messages with hop count exceeded, and segue.merit.edu figured prominently. Pam? You here? Cheers, -- jra? -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Buy copies of The New Hackers Dictionary. The Suncoast Freenet Give them to all your friends. Tampa Bay, Florida http://www.ccil.org/jargon/ +1 813 790 7592
At 21:30 -0500 17 March 1999, Jay R. Ashworth <jra> wrote:
segue appears to be the problem. Right before the batch o'dupes, I got half a dozen messages with hop count exceeded, and segue.merit.edu figured prominently.
Pam? You here?
The problem was a subscriber at raytheon (via ti, via paranet). From the headers I've seen it looks like mail for him started getting backed up on one raytheon machine last week and apparently when the destination machine came back up today it all started getting spewed back to the list. Right around 5:00 p.m. EST, we dropped him from the list and put in a filter to stop these messages, but a lot had already been queued. In the future, majordomo will be inserting an "X-Loop: nanog" header and stopping any messages that already have that. (Thanks Daniel.) Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks to all who took the time to send a heads-up. -- John Hensley <hensley@merit.edu> Merit Network, Inc.
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:30:40PM -0500, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
segue appears to be the problem. Right before the batch o'dupes, I got half a dozen messages with hop count exceeded, and segue.merit.edu figured prominently.
<AOL>Me too</AOL> and I've been getting other bounce messages which really should probably be going to owner-nanog@merit... -- Steve Sobol sjsobol@nacs.net (AKA support@nacs.net and abuse@nacs.net) "The world is headed for mutiny/When all we want is unity" --Creed, "One"
participants (5)
-
Jared Mauch -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Jeff -
John Hensley -
Steven J. Sobol