Is there a new top-level whois server or did shared registry whois stop
providing references to the appropriate whois servers for .org? At least a
pair of domain registars cannot adjust any .org records claiming that the
domains not exist.
Alex
I noticed this a few days ago -- I thought it was because the domain in
question was being transferred, but after reading your post it seems it was
much more than that.
The root servers aren't providing referrals to the gtld-servers for .org
anymore.. Instead they're referring to here:
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
org. 172800 IN NS A7.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS L7.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS G7.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS F7.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS M5.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS J5.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS I5.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS C5.NSTLD.COM.
org. 172800 IN NS E5.NSTLD.COM.
Anyone know anything about this? I can't find anything on ICANN's web site
regarding a switch.
--Adam
.org is being moved into new Public Internet Registry away from NSI
Their whois server can be found at http://www.orgtransition.info
And if you prefer to get all info at once, I run recursive server at
completewhois.com. It can be used from command-line (unlike PIR's server) -
"whois -h completewhois.com pir.org" for example.
The notice which netsol sent out:
Notice: .ORG Registry Transition Scheduled for January 25 - 26
On January 1, 2003, the Public Interest Registry (PIR) became the new
registry for the .org domain name extension. PIR will now maintain the
authoritative directory of all .org domain names.
Beginning January 25, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. EST, VGRS Registry will disable
its connection to all registrars for .org to begin the transition process.
On January 26, 2003 at 6:00 p.m. EST, PIR will re-establish its connection
with all registrars. However, to ensure all functionality is appropriately
in place, account modifications to current .org domain names cannot be
made for approximately 48 hours following the transition.
During the initial transition period, January 25, 2003 from 9:00 a.m. EST
until January 26, 2003 6:00 p.m. EST, you will not be able to purchase new
.org domain name registrations, transfer .org domain names or make DNS
changes.
Be assured that this maintenance period will not affect the ability for
customers to view your Web site, and it will not impact the delivery of
any of your e-mail.
Please note that Network Solutions(R), Inc. has no control over this
registry transition and all registrars will be affected. We appreciate
your patience as this transition occurs.
on the 31st of December, 02, VeriSign was no longer the registry
operator for .org.
The new registrar is called "Public Interest Registry"
One can only speculate why the whois servers have vanished, however
it should be noted that as of about an hour ago, all sorts of odd
whois output was being served - including incorrect contact information
for domains -- for example, all Dotster-registered .org domains now
show a Mr. George Decarlo as the registrant, admin, billing and tech
contact.
You can use their web-based whois for the time being, but again,
be warned that the data is very much incorrect at this point.
- Tim
In previous mail, alex@yuriev.com said:
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:53:20 -0500
From: Tim Yocum
One can only speculate why the whois servers have vanished,
however it should be noted that as of about an hour ago, all
sorts of odd whois output was being served - including
incorrect contact information for domains
Has the cutover taken place, or might there be some fubar data
conversion in the works?
Eddy
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 09:44:05 -0800
From: Adam McKenna
The root servers aren't providing referrals to the gtld-servers for .org
anymore.. Instead they're referring to here:
[ snip new .org glue RRs that point to nstld.com ]
Anyone know anything about this? I can't find anything on
ICANN's web site regarding a switch.
See previous posts. It's part of the move away from NSOL.
Eddy
Hi, Adam.
] Anyone know anything about this? I can't find anything on ICANN's web site
] regarding a switch.
I noticed it on 8 Jan, and adjusted my monitoring accordingly.
http://www.cymru.com/DNS/gtlddns-o.html
Thanks,
Rob.
Is there a new top-level whois server or did shared registry whois stop
providing references to the appropriate whois servers for .org?
Alex
--
Alex-
The new whois server for the .ORG TLD can be found at
whois.publicinterestregistry.net. Web interface for .ORG WHOIS can
be found at <URI:http://www.pir.org/whois/>.
The VGRS -> PIR migration has been mentioned in sibling messages.
For more information on current status and future plans you can
consult the PIR website at <URI:http://www.pir.org/>.
Note that PIR has contracted with Afilias (think .INFO) for
operations of .ORG. Afilias' .INFO is a "thick" registry, with
centralized WHOIS, not referral WHOIS. .ORG is planned to make the
transition to a "thick" registry with centralized WHOIS, but at this
time it is in a state of in-between.
WHOIS output from whois.publicinterestregistry.net is of a nearly
identical format as that of whois.afilias.info. Difference with .ORG
is that all of the contact information looks similar to this example:
Registrant ID:11-C
Registrant Name:CONTACT NOT AUTHORITATIVE
Registrant Street1:Whois Server:whois.opensrs.net
Registrant Street2:Referral URL:www.opensrs.org
Registrant City:N/A
Registrant Postal Code:N/A
Registrant Country:CA
Registrant Email:not@available.org
Some whois clients will see the "Whois Server:" referral and follow
it, some will not.
At some point in the future, PIR has stated that they plan to have
centralized whois, which leads me to assume that the referrals will
go away.
At least a pair of domain registars cannot adjust any .org records
claiming that the domains not exist.
These registrars have yet to catch up to the VGRS -> PIR migration,
perhaps.
There may have been a few complications in the migration that I have
caught wind of, but not being a registrar, I don't have much in the
way of an inside track.
hope this helps,
-jeff
Jan 2, 2003
http://news.com.com/2110-1023-978940.html
Seems to be fairly public knowledge and in the 'media' for a bit.
on the 31st of December, 02, VeriSign was no longer the registry
operator for .org.The new registrar is called "Public Interest Registry"
One can only speculate why the whois servers have vanished,
whois.crsnic.net was the old whois server which reported data from the verisign thin registry for ORG. It still provides information for COM and NET, since those zones are still run by Verisign Registry.
whois.publicinterestregistry.net is the whois server being run by the PIR, who are running the new ORG registry. The output format of the PIR whois service is possibly slightly confusing; the PIR's plan is to transition ORG from a thin registry to a thick registry, and right now the whois server is showing responses which look like thick registry responses, based on thin registry data.
(if you knew this, and by "vanished" you meant something else, then apologies).
The response formatting looks weird to me: "Registrant Street1:Whois Server:whois.networksolutions.com"? What? Maybe beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
wrt data inaccuracies, the ISC's administrative addresses are not in Canada, and I guess the available.org people are having fun with all the spam from whois-harvesting spambots. Perhaps "NOT ACCURATE" should be substituted for "NOT AUTHORITATIVE".
Joe
The new whois server for the .ORG TLD can be found at
whois.publicinterestregistry.net. Web interface for .ORG WHOIS can
be found at <URI:http://www.pir.org/whois/>.
Wed Jan 29 11:08:09
matt@pants:~$ whois -h whois.publicinterestregistry.net unibrow.org
whois: whois.publicinterestregistry.net: host unknown
--mghali@snark.net------------------------------------------<darwin><
Flowers on the razor wire/I know you're here/We are few/And far
between/I was thinking about her skin/Love is a many splintered
thing/Don't be afraid now/Just walk on in. #include <disclaim.h>
$ whois -h whois.publicinterestregistry.net unibrow.org
[whois.publicinterestregistry.net]
[snip whois disclaimer]
Domain ID:D59154800-LROR
Domain Name:UNIBROW.ORG
Created On:09-Feb-2001 06:42:45 UTC
Last Updated On:05-Nov-2001 19:14:56 UTC
Expiration Date:09-Feb-2003 06:42:45 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:R23-LROR
Status:OK
[snip registrant, admin/billing/tech POC fields]
Name Server:NS1.SECONDARY.COM
Name Server:NS2.SECONDARY.COM
$ host whois.publicinterestregistry.net
whois.publicinterestregistry.net. has address 129.33.96.137
-jeff
I tried an nslookup about 20 minutes after I sent that mail, and it
succeeded as well. Probably a pbi.net barf near my end as all three
auth nameservers returned me the correct info.
Of course, there's still the issue of the whois returning complete
garbage, aside from the two nameserver entries..
matto
>
>
> The new whois server for the .ORG TLD can be found at
> whois.publicinterestregistry.net. Web interface for .ORG WHOIS can
> be found at <URI:http://www.pir.org/whois/>.
>
> Wed Jan 29 11:08:09
> matt@pants:~$ whois -h whois.publicinterestregistry.net unibrow.org
> whois: whois.publicinterestregistry.net: host unknown
$ whois -h whois.publicinterestregistry.net unibrow.org
[whois.publicinterestregistry.net]
[snip whois disclaimer]
Domain ID:D59154800-LROR
Domain Name:UNIBROW.ORG
Created On:09-Feb-2001 06:42:45 UTC
Last Updated On:05-Nov-2001 19:14:56 UTC
Expiration Date:09-Feb-2003 06:42:45 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:R23-LROR
Status:OK
[snip registrant, admin/billing/tech POC fields]
Name Server:NS1.SECONDARY.COM
Name Server:NS2.SECONDARY.COM
$ host whois.publicinterestregistry.net
whois.publicinterestregistry.net. has address 129.33.96.137
-jeff
Hi,
Does anybody know how/if I can force cisco router to consider ospf route
(I'll consider other igp protocol if its possible) from particular source
to be prefereble over connected and locally-entered static routes. This is
needed for failover project I'm doing. Please note that especially big
question is with "connected" route through subinterface, which I can't
find any way to override with igp, for static I could at least make them
learned igp routes.
I'd apprecitate to know how somebody has done something this or at least
find for sure that its impossible. If it matters, I'm trying to do it
on 7500 running 12.0 ios and interfaces are ethernet isl vlans.
Does anybody know how/if I can force cisco router to consider ospf route
(I'll consider other igp protocol if its possible) from particular source
to be prefereble over connected and locally-entered static routes. This is
needed for failover project I'm doing. Please note that especially big
question is with "connected" route through subinterface, which I can't
find any way to override with igp, for static I could at least make them
learned igp routes.
You can change the administrative distance/protocol priorities, but I think
this only works for everything but connected. If I'm not mistaken (not at a
router) connected is set to 0 and can't be changed. What you are proposing
is dangerous. There's usually a better way to handle a backup. I'm guessing
that you have a distant connection at least two hops away that when it goes
down you want to activate a pvc into a frame or atm cloud. If all end points
in such a cloud are routers, it's best to use a routing protocol across the
cloud and make the routes unprefered. When the other routes go down, the new
routes come up. With statics, the administrative distance is the last
number. In BGP, we often set our null routes to 254 or 255 so that the null
route is NEVER prefered over another route.
Jack Bates
BrightNet Oklahoma
Static is simple: just enter an administrative distance (extra argument
at the end) that is higher than OSPF's. Connected has a fixed distance,
as far as I know. But you can get around this by simply putting more
specifics in your IGP. For instance, if the interface has a /24, you let
the router elsewehere announce the two /25s that make up this /24.
Does anybody know how/if I can force cisco router to consider ospf route
(I'll consider other igp protocol if its possible) from particular source
to be prefereble over connected and locally-entered static routes. This is
needed for failover project I'm doing. Please note that especially big
question is with "connected" route through subinterface, which I can't
find any way to override with igp, for static I could at least make them
learned igp routes.
For a static route you can force another metric:
ip route x.x.x.x y.y.y.y z.z.z.z metric <worse than ospf>
afaik a connected interface will always have a weight of 0 (best) and it's
not changable.
BUT you can force the OSPF metric when importing that connected-route into
OSPF.
!
router ospf 123
redistribute static metric xxxxx
!
This will not change the "best route" locally on the router, but only on the
rest of your OSPF network...
P.
You have to change the admin distances. Unfortunately for you, I don't
think there is a way to change the admin distance for a connected interface
which has a default of zero. Anyone know of a selective way to do that?
OSPF is 110 by default, statics are 1 by default, but you can set their
distance on a per route basis, 'ip route x.x.x.x y.y.y.y v.v.v.v distance'.
What exactly are you trying to do? There may be other mechanisms to
accomplish what you want.
Tim McKee