[routing-wg]Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-09 New Policy Proposal (ASPLAIN Format for the Registration of 4-byte ASNs)
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-09 New Policy Proposal (ASPLAIN Format for the Registration of 4-byte ASNs)
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]Re: [address-policy-wg] whois and 4 byte ASNs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Joao Damas
Joao_Damas at isc.org
Wed Oct 22 11:46:35 CEST 2008
Indeed. FOr some time now the RIRs have backed the joint whois project, which is operated by LACNIC. http://lacnic.net/cgi-bin/lacnic/whois?lg=EN or whois -h whois.lacnic.net There is no format translation, you get the native thing from each of the registries (with a note for the source of the info at the beginning) Why would you use any other whois server for IP/ASNs/RPSL? Joao On 20 Oct 2008, at 20:47, Garry Glendown wrote: > Rob Evans wrote: >> >> I agree, both with your sentiment and the proposal, but the "more >> easily remembered" tag is a bit more than irrelevant. Whilst the >> low-order 16 bits might not be memorable, it might be quite easy to >> keep up with which registries have used which upper 16 bits for a >> little while, so manual 'whois' queries can be directed to the >> appropriate server. >> > Why would _YOU_ worry about memorizing which RIR to forward a query > to? > I thought that's what we have computers & programs for ;) > > I also agree with the proposal; amongst other things, AS regex would > be > a nightmare with different representation (except maybe automagically > converting all 16 Bit AS to 0.x format) > > -garry >
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-09 New Policy Proposal (ASPLAIN Format for the Registration of 4-byte ASNs)
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]Re: [address-policy-wg] whois and 4 byte ASNs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]