RE: DB consistancy checking tools
I won't be at RIPE-35 as my first child is due at the same time but I'll definitely knock something together as a draft. If other people are interested then things should go ahead at RIPE-35 otherwise I do have permission from my wife to attend RIPE-36 ;-) Kind regards Matthew -----Original Message----- From: Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet [mailto:woeber@cc.univie.ac.at] Sent: 20 January 2000 14:55 To: matthew@planet.net.uk Cc: lir-wg@ripe.net; db-wg@ripe.net; woeber@cc.univie.ac.at Subject: RE: DB consistancy checking tools Matthew, I think this is an interesting proposal:
I have been wondering recently whether a separate group should be set up for the sole purpose of creating tools/advise/methods/hints 'n' tips for LIR's to keep on top of their entries and make management easier. A sort of RIPE users working group not concerned with designing objects for the database but how to put existing objects in it, remove them, manage them, etc.
My 2c
Matthew
To start things moving, could you come up with a coarse draft of ideas and short-term goals to take up? On the more formal side, one of the possible solutions to accomodate that activity might be to create a TaskForce to work on well-defined items during RIPE35 (do you intend to particpate?). This TF might be supported by both LIR and DB, or sponsored by whichever group is seen to be appropriate... Wilfried.
Hi Matthew. Can I congratulate with a son or daughter now ? Here are some ideas to a future Task Force. I have some ideas about consistency in the Ripe Whois DB and in the LIRs own assignment files/DB, and also in between them. If we want to come up with some tools/hints for LIR's to keep on top of their entries, I suggest that we also include tools/hints to check the consistency between the LIRs own assignment files/DB and the Ripe Whois DB. One way to do this is to download the inetnum db from ftp.ripe.net, extract the LIRs inetnums, do a consistency check of the inetnums, and finally do a consistency check between the inetnums and the assignment files/DB (and why not do a consistency check between the inetnums and all customer routes ?). I guess there are not many LIRs doing this today (except us). The drawback with this solution is that we have to download the whole inetnum db (12,5Mb) and extract all our inetnums. Here's an idea that belongs to the db-gw, but it is related to the idea described above: To ease the load on the RIPE NCC ftp/whois server and our servers, any LIR should be able to request an automatic extract every 24 hours of their allocated blocks. -- Regards Thor-Henrik Kvandahl Nextra AS Norway On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Matthew Robinson wrote:
I won't be at RIPE-35 as my first child is due at the same time but I'll definitely knock something together as a draft. If other people are interested then things should go ahead at RIPE-35 otherwise I do have permission from my wife to attend RIPE-36 ;-)
Kind regards
Matthew
-----Original Message----- From: Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet [mailto:woeber@cc.univie.ac.at] Sent: 20 January 2000 14:55 To: matthew@planet.net.uk Cc: lir-wg@ripe.net; db-wg@ripe.net; woeber@cc.univie.ac.at Subject: RE: DB consistancy checking tools
Matthew,
I think this is an interesting proposal:
I have been wondering recently whether a separate group should be set up for the sole purpose of creating tools/advise/methods/hints 'n' tips for LIR's to keep on top of their entries and make management easier. A sort of RIPE users working group not concerned with designing objects for the database but how to put existing objects in it, remove them, manage them, etc.
My 2c
Matthew
To start things moving, could you come up with a coarse draft of ideas and short-term goals to take up?
On the more formal side, one of the possible solutions to accomodate that activity might be to create a TaskForce to work on well-defined items during RIPE35 (do you intend to particpate?). This TF might be supported by both LIR and DB, or sponsored by whichever group is seen to be appropriate...
Wilfried.
Thor-Henrik Kvandahl writes:
I guess there are not many LIRs doing this today (except us).
You're not alone :)
The drawback with this solution is that we have to download the whole inetnum db (12,5Mb) and extract all our inetnums.
Why does whois -M <your allocation block> or whois -i mnt-by <your inetnum maintainer> not work for you? Robert
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Robert Kiessling wrote:
Thor-Henrik Kvandahl writes:
I guess there are not many LIRs doing this today (except us).
You're not alone :) Good.
The drawback with this solution is that we have to download the whole inetnum db (12,5Mb) and extract all our inetnums.
Why does
whois -M <your allocation block>
or
whois -i mnt-by <your inetnum maintainer>
not work for you?
It does :-) I just thought getting a small compressed file with ftp would be better if many LIRs started to do this. Perhaps someone from the DBM group can comment on this ? -- Thor-Henrik
Robert
Deat Thor-Henrik, Thor-Henrik Kvandahl wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Robert Kiessling wrote:
Thor-Henrik Kvandahl writes:
I guess there are not many LIRs doing this today (except us).
You're not alone :) Good.
The drawback with this solution is that we have to download the whole inetnum db (12,5Mb) and extract all our inetnums.
Why does
whois -M <your allocation block>
or
whois -i mnt-by <your inetnum maintainer>
not work for you?
It does :-) I just thought getting a small compressed file with ftp would be better if many LIRs started to do this. Perhaps someone from the DBM group can comment on this ?
From the performance point of view the two approaches seem to be almost
the same. There should not be many cases when this extracted information could be re-used which may benefit the performance. Unless you have in mind some easy-to-use tool for LIR (with web interface, options, etc.)
-- Thor-Henrik
Robert
Regards, -- Andrei Robachevsky DB Group RIPE NCC
Hi I do not see what all the fuss is about, all i asked for was the access to the tool which the hostmasters use to audit the IP space for a given registry and range. I do not want to reinvent the wheel there is a perfectly usable tool we just need access to it. Regards, -- Stephen Burley Tel: +44 01223 581051 UUNET Fax: 330 Science Park, Cambridge eMail: stephenb@uk.uu.net
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 12:42:00PM +0100, Thor-Henrik Kvandahl wrote:
Hi Matthew.
Can I congratulate with a son or daughter now ?
Here are some ideas to a future Task Force.
I have some ideas about consistency in the Ripe Whois DB and in the LIRs own assignment files/DB, and also in between them. If we want to come up with some tools/hints for LIR's to keep on top of their entries, I suggest that we also include tools/hints to check the consistency between the LIRs own assignment files/DB and the Ripe Whois DB. One way to do this is to download the inetnum db from ftp.ripe.net, extract the LIRs inetnums, do a consistency check of the inetnums, and finally do a consistency check between the inetnums and the assignment files/DB (and why not do a consistency check between the inetnums and all customer routes ?).
I guess there are not many LIRs doing this today (except us). The drawback with this solution is that we have to download the whole inetnum db (12,5Mb) and extract all our inetnums.
Here's an idea that belongs to the db-gw, but it is related to the idea described above: To ease the load on the RIPE NCC ftp/whois server and our servers, any LIR should be able to request an automatic extract every 24 hours of their allocated blocks.
This command will extract all more specific objects under 148.122/16: whois -h whois.ripe.net -F -r -T inetnum -M 148.122/16 Xystein Nerhus, KPNQwest Norway
participants (6)
-
Andrei Robachevsky -
Matthew Robinson -
Oystein Nerhus -
Robert Kiessling -
Stephen Burley -
Thor-Henrik Kvandahl