Finally, the ability to submit assignment and allocation information via
rwhois seems like a license for inconsistency. Rwhois was a great idea that
never took off. It would be interesting if this information could be
provided by splintering off a new DNS class (or at least some new RR types.)
Has anyone ever considered this?
Mark
rWhois is still a great idea, however the learning curve is a bit steep.
It is possible to dump RPSL data into the DNS and use the inverse tree
to track assignments & allocations. It can even be used to track
prefered announcing parties. (being able to track proxy aggregations
fairly easily.) Varients on these types of proposals were made in the
old RIDEwg in the IETF (prox 2 years ago) and there was a NANOG presentation
on using the data in the DNS to authenticate routing announcements. Twas
a bit extreme.
That said, I'll posit that the adoption rate of new DNS code is fairly
slow (based on 3 years of study) and so even if some goofy new class or
RR type is promoted, it would not get deployed anytime soon.
> Finally, the ability to submit assignment and allocation information
> via rwhois seems like a license for inconsistency. Rwhois was a
> great idea that never took off. It would be interesting if this
> information could be provided by splintering off a new DNS class
> (or at least some new RR types.) Has anyone ever considered this?
>
> Mark
That said, I'll posit that the adoption rate of new DNS code is fairly
slow (based on 3 years of study) and so even if some goofy new class or
RR type is promoted, it would not get deployed anytime soon.
All of this stuff (global WHOIS included) really needs to go into LDAP,
using standardized schemas for the relevant data. Obviously the schema is
job #1. All of the [g/cc]TLD databases and numbering authoritites really
should have made this a collective priority a couple of years ago.
Note that putting the data into LDAP doesn't preclude WHOIS clients from
talking to a WHOIS server which proxies the LDAP data.