InterNIC - We put the "I" in incompetent.

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

Hello boys and girls. The time is now 0800 EST and of course, whois is
still screwed.

[rs.internic.net]

Registrant:
EnterZone.Net (ENTERZONE2-DOM)
   604 East Rich Street
   Columbus, OH 43215
   US

   Domain Name: ENTERZONE.NET

   Record last updated on 09-May-97.
   Database last updated on 13-Mar-99 23:57:32 EST.

   Domain servers in listed order:

   NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5
   NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6

The InterNIC Registration Services database contains ONLY
non-military and non-US Government Domains and contacts.
Other associated whois servers:
   American Registry for Internet Numbers - whois.arin.net
   European IP Address Allocations - whois.ripe.net
   Asia Pacific IP Address Allocations - whois.apnic.net
   US Military - whois.nic.mil
   US Government - whois.nic.gov

Lets see... Where do we begin...

1) They lost the data from our update.

From: Domain Registration Role Account <domreg@internic.net>
Message-Id: <199903121048.FAA03704@mts2.internic.net>
Subject: Re: [NIC-990310.2ebf] ENTERZONE.NET
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 05:48:48 -0500 (EST)
Reply-To: domreg@internic.net
To: John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net
X-Mailer: fastmail [version 2.4 PL24alpha4]
X-UIDL: e1f57853ffcc7b0ad65532566d6484df

The updates, of the domain name shown below, have been completed. If you
wish to make changes to this domain in the future, please submit a Domain
Name Registration Agreement to:

         HOSTMASTER@INTERNIC.NET
    
Please write "modify" on line 0a.

All requests completed before 19:00 Eastern time will be included in the
root server update. The root zone files are updated 7 days a week. These
changes should be visible in our Whois database the following day.

If you wish to make changes to the domain record, contact record, host
record or the registrant name, please use the following URL to complete
the proper form:

          http://rs.internic.net/help/templates.html

Network Solutions is not an agent or representative of your Internet
Service Provider, web-hosting company, or other organizations with which
you have contracted for Internet-related services. This change to your
domain name record does not amend, modify, or otherwise affect the terms
and conditions of any agreement(s) you may have with third parties.

Network Solutions, Inc.
E-mail: hostmaster@internic.net
Phone: 703-742-4777(Monday-Friday 7:00am to 9:00pm Eastern Time)
Fax: 703-742-9552

EnterZone.Net (ENTERZONE2-DOM)
  6227 Headley Road
  Gahanna, OH 43230
  US

  Domain Name: ENTERZONE.NET

  Administrative Contact:
     Fraizer, John (JF1998) John.Fraizer@ENTERZONE.NET
     +1 614 316-2708
  Technical Contact:
     Network Operations Center (NOC179-ORG) noc@ENTERZONE.NET
     +1 614 316-2708
  Billing Contact:
     Network Operations Center (NOC179-ORG) noc@ENTERZONE.NET
     +1 614 316-2708

  Record last updated on 12-Mar-99.
  Domain servers in listed order:

  NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5
  NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6

=========================================================================

Why do any of even take the time to keep our records up to date when they
just go lose them, corrupt them, ignore them?

2) They took the POC information out of the display both from rwhois and
telnet. Just how are we supposed to find the POCs for a domain now?

3) They are causing service effecting outages with NO NOTICE to US, their
customers.

This is getting real %^&*# old, real %^*# fast.

I wish they would start spending my $35/yr per domain on clue.

2

Hello boys and girls. The time is now 0800 EST and of course, whois is
still screwed.

examples snipped.....

Why do any of even take the time to keep our records up to date when they
just go lose them, corrupt them, ignore them?

2) They took the POC information out of the display both from rwhois and
telnet. Just how are we supposed to find the POCs for a domain now?

3) They are causing service effecting outages with NO NOTICE to US, their
customers.

This is getting real %^&*# old, real %^*# fast.

I wish they would start spending my $35/yr per domain on clue.

Try using "whois dump domain.name". You might have to do it on each of
the objects you want to look up the info for though, and others seem to
be obfuiscated....

3

> This is getting real %^&*# old, real %^*# fast.
>
> I wish they would start spending my $35/yr per domain on clue.

Try using "whois dump domain.name". You might have to do it on each of
the objects you want to look up the info for though, and others seem to
be obfuiscated....

Still can't find some domains I registered last week which were in Whois
as of Friday.

4

Hmm... same subnet...

RFC 1912 has this to say: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1912.txt

   You are required to have at least two nameservers for every domain,
   though more is preferred. Have secondaries outside your network.
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You could try trading secondary services with someone else or you could
join the ISP/C in order to get use of their three secondary servers.
http://www.ispc.org/benefits/

5

   NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5
   NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6

Hmm... same subnet...

Michael, you should know better than that. I do not see a subnet mask on
these IP addresses. There is nothing stopping a Network Operator from
making these /32s and putting them on different networks.

Of course, a traceroute confirms that they are at least going through the
same router on the last hop, so they are likely on the same subnet. But
your assumption was still a bit premature.

That said, I completely agree that using something like the ISPC is a good
idea. You get secondaries all over the country on different ASes, not just
different subnets in your own AS.

Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael@memra.com

TTFN,
patrick

I Am Not An Isp - www.ianai.net
ISPF, The Forum for ISPs by ISPs, <http://www.ispf.com>
"Think of it as evolution in action." - Niven & Pournelle

6

Nothing except community consensus that it is a *BAD* thing to pollute the
global routing table with lots of long prefixes.

7

>> NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5
>> NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6
>
>Hmm... same subnet...

Michael, you should know better than that. I do not see a subnet mask on
these IP addresses. There is nothing stopping a Network Operator from
making these /32s and putting them on different networks.

Nothing except community consensus that it is a *BAD* thing to pollute the
global routing table with lots of long prefixes.

I am capable of putting /32s in my network an announcing the aggregate. We
did this at Priori, Michael. Justin programmed each loopback as a /32 out
of the same /24, so we had x.x.x.1 on the west coast and x.x.x.2 on the
east coast, but still only announced the /18.

Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael@memra.com

TTFN,
patrick

I Am Not An Isp - www.ianai.net
ISPF, The Forum for ISPs by ISPs, <http://www.ispf.com>
"Think of it as evolution in action." - Niven & Pournelle

8

Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com> writes:

> Michael, you should know better than that. I do not see a subnet mask on
> these IP addresses. There is nothing stopping a Network Operator from
> making these /32s and putting them on different networks.

Nothing except community consensus that it is a *BAD* thing to pollute the
global routing table with lots of long prefixes.

Um, the point is that they're advertised *internally* as /32, and
*externally* as part of their larger aggregate. There's no need to
announce the addresses as /32s externally to have this scheme work.
We're using this at my place of employ already, and it works quite nicely.

9

   NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5
   NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.6

Hmm... same subnet...

Michael, you should know better than that. I do not see a subnet mask on
these IP addresses. There is nothing stopping a Network Operator from
making these /32s and putting them on different networks.

Nothing except community consensus that it is a *BAD* thing to pollute the
global routing table with lots of long prefixes.

I am capable of putting /32s in my network an announcing the aggregate. We
did this at Priori, Michael. Justin programmed each loopback as a /32 out
of the same /24, so we had x.x.x.1 on the west coast and x.x.x.2 on the
east coast, but still only announced the /18.

traceroute to 209.41.244.5 (209.41.244.5), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 gw.44IETF.MR.Net (209.32.95.254) 14.248 ms 5.702 ms 5.449 ms
2 mrnet-IETF-2.UPP.MR.Net (137.192.170.93) 14.255 ms 12.399 ms 7.584 ms
3 core1.UPP.MR.Net (204.220.31.254) 13.795 ms 8.132 ms 8.211 ms
4 aads.fnsi.net (198.32.130.64) 25.371 ms 25.189 ms 26.577 ms
5 core1-hssi101.Columbus.fnsi.net (209.115.127.225) 35.778 ms 30.226 ms 33.013 ms
6 ENTERZONE.Columbus.fnsi.net (209.115.127.22) 31.121 ms 30.784 ms 30.580 ms
7 NS1.ENTERZONE.NET (209.41.244.5) 34.295 ms 30.942 ms 30.624 ms

roam.psg.com:/usr/home/randy> traceroute 209.41.244.6
traceroute to 209.41.244.6 (209.41.244.6), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 gw.44IETF.MR.Net (209.32.95.254) 9.571 ms 5.451 ms 5.396 ms
2 mrnet-IETF-2.UPP.MR.Net (137.192.170.93) 9.071 ms 7.631 ms 7.817 ms
3 core1.UPP.MR.Net (204.220.31.254) 9.045 ms 8.343 ms 8.340 ms
4 aads.fnsi.net (198.32.130.64) 24.862 ms 23.892 ms 26.196 ms
5 core1-hssi101.Columbus.fnsi.net (209.115.127.225) 31.046 ms 29.786 ms 31.106 ms
6 ENTERZONE.Columbus.fnsi.net (209.115.127.22) 30.355 ms 31.590 ms 32.866 ms
7 NS2.ENTERZONE.NET (209.41.244.6) 32.493 ms 30.425 ms 31.418 ms

10

Most of the people on this list do not operate a national backbone. This
aggregation technique is just fine if you really do have geographical
diversity of nameserver location inside your AS. I'm not sure why anyone
would go to the trouble of making it appear that their nameservers are in
the same room when they are not. Priori had nameservers at PAIX and at
Erols in Fairfax County, VA.

But if a network does not have geographical diversity inside their AS then
all of this /32 aggregation magic is for naught. If national backbones
look like this:

   NS0.VERIO.NET 205.238.52.46
   NS1.VERIO.NET 204.91.99.140

   NS1.SPRINTLINK.NET 204.117.214.10
   NS2.SPRINTLINK.NET 199.2.252.9
   NS3.SPRINTLINK.NET 204.97.212.10

   NS.CW.NET 204.70.128.1
   NS2.CW.NET 204.70.57.242
   NS3.CW.NET 204.70.25.234
   NS4.CW.NET 204.70.49.234

then why wouldn't all ISPs look like this?

   NS1.EXAMPLE.COM 192.0.2.17
   NS2.EXAMPLE.COM 204.97.212.10
   NS3.EXAMPLE.COM 205.91.99.140

instead of the minimalist slapdash technique

   NS1.EXAMPLE.COM 192.0.2.44
   NS2.EXAMPLE.COM 192.0.2.45

It's not hard to find an ISP in another state or another country to trade
secondary DNS. And when the backhoe cuts a major fiber link in your area
used by all three of your upstream providers, the world will know that you
still exist. If you use the minimalist slapdash technique the world will
think that you've gone out of business.

11

[SNIP - Randy's traceroutes]

Thanx Randy, but if you had actually read the thread instead of trying to
pounce on a possible error (just like Michael), you would have seen in my
first post that I stated a traceroute shows both IPs have the same last
router hop and are likely on the same subnet.

Add to that the fact that there are load balancing techniques which use
duplicated IP addrs in different geographical regions and you once again
have no proof - just an implication.

Before anyone else pounces on this, YES, I believe it is likely that these
two machines (if it is two machines) are sitting next to one another and
the original poster should get more diverse DNS. The point of my post is
that people who just look at IP addresses (or a single traceroute :wink: and
make sweeping generalizations might find their assumptions disproven.

Sorry about being pedantic, but I've dealt with one too many users who just
assume stuff based on tools like traceroute without understanding the
underlying technology (asymmetry, load balancing, etc.). I really think
anyone on this list should *not* have to be educated the way lusers do.

TTFN,
patrick

I Am Not An Isp - www.ianai.net
ISPF, The Forum for ISPs by ISPs, <http://www.ispf.com>
"Think of it as evolution in action." - Niven & Pournelle

12

What makes you assume they're even different machines...

Cheers,
-- jr 'ifconfig dummy0' a

13

But if a network does not have geographical diversity inside their AS then
all of this /32 aggregation magic is for naught. If national backbones
look like this:

   NS0.VERIO.NET 205.238.52.46
   NS1.VERIO.NET 204.91.99.140

clue:

ns1.verio.net is hosted by digex. we read rfc2182.

randy

14

^^^^
Randy,

Didn't you co-write rfc2182? :slight_smile:
              ^^^^^

Network Working Group R. Elz
Request for Comments: 2182 University of Melbourne
BCP: 16 R. Bush
Category: Best Current Practice RGnet, Inc.
                                                              S. Bradner
                                                      Harvard University
                                                               M. Patton
                                                              Consultant
                                                               July 1997

-David

15

When I type, i read what i type.

  When I write, I read what i write.

  The "WE" is the key part, meaning their hostmasters,
and dns maintainers, etc..

  - jared

16

If someone writes down a good idea once, are they forever banned from
mentioning it again? Or are you concerned that Randy might get rich from
the royalties on RFC 2182? ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2182.txt

:wink:

17

<yawn> kids we ready to move on yet...

18

first post that I stated a traceroute shows both IPs have the same last
router hop and are likely on the same subnet.

Correct. Both machines actually do live in close proximity to each other.

Add to that the fact that there are load balancing techniques which use
duplicated IP addrs in different geographical regions and you once again
have no proof - just an implication.

Not that fancy. Not yet. If the internic would process get with it and
process our update, it would show two additional nameservers on the domain
however. (On different networks, which are in different geographical regions.)

Before anyone else pounces on this, YES, I believe it is likely that these
two machines (if it is two machines) are sitting next to one another and
the original poster should get more diverse DNS. The point of my post is

See previous sentence.

[root@Overkill /]# /sbin/route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
NS1.ENTERZONE.N * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth0:0
209.41.244.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 218 eth0
199.201.138.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 16 eth1
127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 1288 lo
default Border-Core0-Fa 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 431211 eth0

[root@Plaything:/]# /sbin/route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
NS2.ENTERZONE.N * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth0:0
209.41.244.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 869 eth0
199.201.138.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 4 eth1
127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 1111 lo
default Border-Core0-Fa 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 262383 eth0

that people who just look at IP addresses (or a single traceroute :wink: and
make sweeping generalizations might find their assumptions disproven.

In this case, they were correct. I suppose they would have felt better if
we had something like:

NS1.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.244.5
NS2.ENTERZONE.NET 209.41.222.129
NS3.ENTERZONE.NET 216.28.26.5
NS4.ENTERZONE.NET 209.115.110.130
NS5.ENTERZONE.NET 199.201.138.5

Sure does look more impressive, doesn't it. Sheesh people. The last time
I checked, I wasn't providing primary of secondary name service for any of
your domains. We've never been dark outside of scheduled maintenance, not
even as a result of TIFF or BIFF. I feel very lucky in that statement. I
suppose it is a testament to the guys at FNSI.

Sorry about being pedantic, but I've dealt with one too many users who just
assume stuff based on tools like traceroute without understanding the
underlying technology (asymmetry, load balancing, etc.). I really think
anyone on this list should *not* have to be educated the way lusers do.

I was told by a wise individual that the only use for assumption is to make
an ASS out of U and ME. From what I've observed, there are a few
individuals on the list, myself included at times, that need no help in
this category. Leave the assumptions, snide remarks about another operator
having less than sufficient clue, etc out of it.

Since we're talking about my nameservers and I've told you everything there
is to know about them, there should be no more need for discussion of this
matter on the list.

19

> Didn't you co-write rfc2182? :slight_smile:
> ^^^^^
If someone writes down a good idea once, are they forever banned from
mentioning it again?

and again, and again, and again. Those of us that work with Randy (Dave's
one of us) have gotten to hear plenty about 1982, 2181, and 2182. You'd
think he's proud of them. :wink:

Or are you concerned that Randy might get rich from
the royalties on RFC 2182? ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2182.txt

we want a refund! :slight_smile:

party on,
Sam

(ObNetOps: ethernet auto-negotion doesn't)

20

You'd class Tony Randall as a wise individual?

ObOps: has anyone heard anything new and official on the latest whois
screwup? Mark? David?

Cheers,
-- jra