[db-wg] Route objects for space administered by other RIRs
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Route objects for space administered by other RIRs
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Route objects for space administered by other RIRs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
denis walker
ripedenis at gmail.com
Thu May 13 02:19:34 CEST 2021
Hi Ronald Interesting that you have tried to build a tool to get the correct whois data on a resource from any RIR. The RIPE Database already does this for you. The RIPE NCC mirrors all the other RIR resource databases and some independent IRR databases in a Global Resource Service (GRS) If you include the flag '--resource' in your query to the RIPE Database you will get a response from all sources. whois -r --resource 62.61.192.0/18 inetnum: 62.61.192.0 - 62.61.255.255 netname: SRR-DYN-DSL descr: Societe Reunionnaise du Radiotelephone country: RE org: ORG-SRdR1-AFRINIC admin-c: DUMY-RIPE tech-c: DUMY-RIPE status: ALLOCATED PA notify: ***@gaoland.net notify: ***@srr.fr notify: ***@sfr.com notify: ***@neufcegetel.fr notify: ***@srr.fr mnt-by: AFRINIC-HM-MNT mnt-lower: SRR-mnt source: AFRINIC-GRS remarks: **************************** remarks: * THIS OBJECT IS MODIFIED remarks: * Please note that all data that is generally regarded as personal remarks: * data has been removed from this object. remarks: * To view the original object, please query the AFRINIC Database at: remarks: * http://www.afrinic.net/ remarks: **************************** as well as the two different ROUTE objects from RIPE and RADB Databases. As for when this resource was transferred, IANA shows that 62/8 was allocated to the RIPE NCC. According to the RIPE NCC web page listing all 'valid' transfers, there have not been any transfers from RIPE to AFRINIC. https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/transfer-statistics/inter-rir/inter-rir-ipv4-transfer-statistics (Maybe I am missing something...) cheers denis co-chair DB-WG On Wed, 12 May 2021 at 21:59, Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg <db-wg at ripe.net> wrote: > > In message <77E5D90B-6733-4CF8-8E15-3D984E4FBFFE at ripe.net>, > Edward Shryane <eshryane at ripe.net> wrote: > > >The RIPE-NONAUTH database contains all out of region route(6) objects > >(referencing prefixes not allocated to RIPE). > > > >This database was created by NWI-5: > >https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2016-May/005245.html > > > >The proposed cleanup is to only remove route(6) objects from > >RIPE-NONAUTH which are not registered in *any* region: > >https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2021-March/006876.html > > > >The cleanup will not delete the 62.61.192.0/18AS49902 route, as the > >prefix is registered to AFRINIC. > > Thank you for the clear answer. > > It is difficult me to tell, based only upon looking at the current > relevant AFRINIC allocation WHOIS records, when, exactly, the > 62.61.192.0/18 was transferred from RIPE to AFRINIC, so let's > just set that point aside for a moment. > > I'd like to ask a more general question anyway, which is just this: > When the authority for some IP number resource is transferred from, > say, RIPE, to some other RIR, is there any good reason why any > associated route objects should not likewise travel to the new RIR > along with the IP block allocation itself? And if there is no such > good reason, then could we please have a rule that says that a > transfer of an IP address block out of the RIPE region will be > followed also by a deletion, in short order, from the RIPE data base > of any directly relevant route object(s)? > > More broadly, it is parhaps a result of my overly-fastidious nature, > but I personally would be in favor of simply deleting all of the > remaining RIPE-NONAUTH route objects from the RIPE data base. Is > there any clear need for any of these? If the relevant IP blocks > have been entirely deallocated, then maintaining the route objects > would seem to be a Bad Idea on the face of it. On the other hand, > if a given IP block has been transferred to some other region, why > doesn't it not make perfect sense for any relevant route objects to > also and likewise be created in the WHOIS data bases of those other > regions? > > It seems that we are now in the era of RPKI and that everyone is being > generally encouraged to take routing security rather more seriously > these days, which is a profoundly Good Thing. Yet it appears that > when it comes to these RIPE-NONAUTH route records, RIPE is still, in > effect catering not just to the last generation of route registration > protocols, but also and even to the generation before that. At what > point in time does will all of this stuff be seen to be what it is, > i.e. antiquated and counterproductive? > > > Regards, > rfg > > > P.S. In response to Frank Habicht's question about the IANA WHOIS > referral server, let me just say that due to the work I have done to > try to build a single tool capable of getting the correct WHOIS record > for any arbitrary IP address from whichever RIR it needs to come from. > I can say definitively and without hesitation that if one were to try > to rely exclusively on whois.iana.org for proper referrals then one > would actually get the Wrong Answer (i.e. one would get pointed to the > Wrong RIR) a really substantial percentage of the time. > > I have asked IANA to "fix this" and they have responded clearly that they > have absolutely no intention of doing so. Thus, for my own tool, I have > been forced to resort to building my own quite lengthy table of exceptions > so that my tool will just ignore what whois.iana.org says in all of the > numerous cases where I have learned that what it says is just plain wrong. > >
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Route objects for space administered by other RIRs
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Route objects for space administered by other RIRs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]