Re: URGENT! Root Servers not updated
On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, John Hawkinson wrote:
Erm... most routing databases use asxxxx, but the NIC uses xxxx. eg. whois -h whois.internic.net 6171
Doesn't anybody read the instructions around here? MY GOODNESS!
whois nnnn
will return all records that match "nnnn", be they people, domains, AS numbers, networks, or what-have-you.
No need to get snarky. You can do it the way you suggest to get only ASes. Or you can skip that to get a list of all records and, in the rare case that there is more than one, do another lookup on that one. On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Christian Nielsen wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 1997, Marc Slemko wrote:
Note, however, that just because an AS shows as not existing in the InterNIC's database doesn't mean it doesn't exist. From what the InterNIC has told me, they have no policy of having pointer records for AS blocks allocated to regional registries; it happens sometimes, it doesn't happen sometimes, all depending on what they feel like doing. That means that to find the owner of an AS you may need to query every regional registery in the world. Right now there are few enough such registries to make it possible, but it is certainly an annoyance.
But if you were to go to
ftp://rs.internic.net/netinfo/asn.txt
You can see who they belong to.
Really? As I said, they do it if they feel like and don't if they don't meaning that some they do. Some, such as the one that as8221 is out of, they don't. For the ones that they do, there are pointers in the whois database saying "oh, go look there" just like there are for netblocks.
PS. I also know that the above file is out of date and needs to be
When I asked the InterNIC about it, the response I got for the above block was not that it had not yet been updated, but that it just hadn't been done, no reason for it.
has the basic problem that paul vixie complained about been solved? I called a knowledgable source last night. That person was aware of the change and said that the proper IANA people had been informed in advance and had (he thought) not disagreed. the change he believed was not for any of the reasons that paul feared. ************************************************************************ The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ************************************************************************
As I understand it (and I really don't so you should stop reading now...) the purpose of locking down the zone files (or whatever) is not necessarily a power grab by NSI, but rather a move to protect the people and information who appear in that database (or whatever) from otherwise nefarious miscreants. Folks who want the file will simply have to register for it. I believe information generally wants to be free, but there may be a good business, technical and socially acceptable case for asking users of the database to identify themselves. Also, it's possible NSI got ahead of themselves and locked stuff up before handing out the keys. What with the move and power grid failures in Herndon, anything's possible. -- JMC On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Gordon Cook wrote:
has the basic problem that paul vixie complained about been solved?
I called a knowledgable source last night. That person was aware of the change and said that the proper IANA people had been informed in advance and had (he thought) not disagreed. the change he believed was not for any of the reasons that paul feared.
On Wed, 2 Jul 1997, Paul A Vixie wrote:
The message below was one of several that came to me today. Apparently, when NSI changed the FTP access controls recently for the COM, ORG, EDU, and NET zones, they also disallowed zone transfers from the "A" name server to most of the other name servers.
has the basic problem that paul vixie complained about been solved?
It doesn't seem to have been solved. g.root-servers.net has lost those zones. $ host -t ns crosslink.net g.root-servers.net crosslink.net NS record currently not present at g.root-servers.net $ host -t ns army.mil g.root-servers.net army.mil NS VGR.ARL.army.mil army.mil NS OCTAGON.TACOM.army.mil army.mil NS HUACHUCA-AIMS2.army.mil $ host -t ns netscape.com g.root-servers.net netscape.com NS record currently not present at g.root-servers.net $ host -t soa net. g.root-servers.net net SOA record currently not present at g.root-servers.net $ host -t soa net. a.root-servers.net net SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.net hostmaster.INTERNIC.net ( 1997070201 ;serial (version) 10800 ;refresh period (3 hours) 900 ;retry interval (15 minutes) 604800 ;expire time (1 week) 86400 ;default ttl (1 day) ) $ host -t soa net. c.root-servers.net net SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.net hostmaster.INTERNIC.net ( 1997062700 ;serial (version) 10800 ;refresh period (3 hours) 900 ;retry interval (15 minutes) 604800 ;expire time (1 week) 86400 ;default ttl (1 day) ) $ date Thu Jul 3 18:22:37 GMT 1997 -- Shields, CrossLink.
I called a knowledgable source last night. That person was aware of the change and said that the proper IANA people had been informed in advance and had (he thought) not disagreed. the change he believed was not for any of the reasons that paul feared.
When Paul spoke for millions of users, he did not speak for this one. He also seems not to have read the message or noted that it claimed to be addressing a problem for which is is known as a prominent net.nazi (and he is welcome speak for me in that area). Then again, NSI has a broad and deep talent for making any act appear to be infinitely perfidious, no matter how well intentioned. So now telling what the real story is. randy
participants (5)
-
Gordon Cook
-
Jesse Caulfield
-
Marc Slemko
-
randy@psg.com
-
shields@crosslink.net