July 1999 - db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

<auto-dbm@ripe.net> is slow this afternoon.
by RIPE Database Administration 17 May '18

17 May '18

Dear Colleagues, Because of a very high level of use this afternoon, the response time of <auto-dbm(a)ripe.net> is longer than normal. I have made contact with those who are responsible and I expect the situation to improve as the machine works through the queue. Please be patient. Obviously we at the RIPE NCC Database Group are continuously working to make the performance of the database as good as possible. However, we cannot make improvements in zero time. We thank you for your co-operation up to now and we ask for your continued co-operation so that everyone receives the best possible service. If you have anymore questions, please contact <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Ambrose Magee ____________________________ RIPE Database Administration.

2 2

Re: Interesting object in the RIPE database
by Steven Bakker 11 Jul '99

11 Jul '99

>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, "RLE" == Robert_Martin-Leg=E8ne wrote: RLE> Doesn't mean that it makes sense in the IP Registry world. Let's be RLE> practical. And besides, classful addressing is a Thing of the Past (ahem). The BSD way of doing it is clever, but complicated and it has no place in the DB, IMO. I always understood that the DB software would pad missing octets at the end of an IP address, no ambiguity there. What I'm surprised about is that the DB apparently allows someone to register address space that's most likely not even theirs... Of course, once it gets allocated and entered into the DB, a conflict will be detected and flagged (right!?), but until then, the error will go undetected. Is this a feature? Cheers, Steven

4 3

Interesting object in the RIPE database
by Niels Bakker 07 Jul '99

07 Jul '99

Hi, I noticed the following object in the RIPE database this afternoon: inetnum: 195.59.213.0 - 213.127.0.255 netname: WILLIAMBROOKES-TF13-GW descr: William Brookes School country: GB admin-c: PC2598-RIPE tech-c: IH22-ORG rev-srv: ns0.insnet.net rev-srv: ns1.insnet.net status: ASSIGNED PA mnt-by: AS5378-MNT changed: cliveg(a)insnet.net 19990706 source: RIPE (I stumbled over it while querying the RIPE database for an object within the APNIC database while accidentally omitting the -a option.) Clive Galway (the creator of this object) told me after I contacted him that he had entered the following information into the template: 195.59.213.0 - 213.127 instead of 195.59.213.0 - 195.59.213.127 He added, "funny that it dont complain though" - I agree wholeheartedly with him here. :) A check for the number of dots in the inetnum: line should be quite easy, and similar to this: # fix for people who don't include the first two or three octets s/^(\d+\.\d+)\.(\d+\.\d+) - (\d+\.\d+)$/$1.$2 - $1.$3/ s/^(\d+\.\d+\.\d+\).(\d+) - (\d+)$/$1.$2 - $1.$3/ if ($_ =~ /^\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+ - \d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+$/) { &complain; } I believe there is a sub to check whether something is a valid IP address but can't find it offhand in my (by now pretty dated) copy of the RIPE database software... With regards, -- Niels Bakker, * * EuroNet Internet BV Network Operations * * Herengracht 208-214 * 1016 BS Amsterdam NJB9 * +31 (0)20 535 5555

3 2