URGENT! Root Servers not updated

> Erm... most routing databases use asxxxx, but the NIC uses xxxx. eg.
> whois -h whois.internic.net 6171

Doesn't anybody read the instructions around here? MY GOODNESS!

  whois nnnn

will return all records that match "nnnn", be they people, domains,
AS numbers, networks, or what-have-you.

No need to get snarky. You can do it the way you suggest to get only
ASes. Or you can skip that to get a list of all records and, in the rare
case that there is more than one, do another lookup on that one.

> Note, however, that just because an AS shows as not existing in the
> InterNIC's database doesn't mean it doesn't exist. From what the InterNIC
> has told me, they have no policy of having pointer records for AS blocks
> allocated to regional registries; it happens sometimes, it doesn't happen
> sometimes, all depending on what they feel like doing. That means that to
> find the owner of an AS you may need to query every regional registery in
> the world. Right now there are few enough such registries to make it
> possible, but it is certainly an annoyance.

  But if you were to go to

  ftp://rs.internic.net/netinfo/asn.txt

  You can see who they belong to.

Really? As I said, they do it if they feel like and don't if they don't
meaning that some they do. Some, such as the one that as8221 is out of,
they don't. For the ones that they do, there are pointers in the whois
database saying "oh, go look there" just like there are for netblocks.

PS. I also know that the above file is out of date and needs to be

When I asked the InterNIC about it, the response I got for the above block
was not that it had not yet been updated, but that it just hadn't been
done, no reason for it.

has the basic problem that paul vixie complained about been solved?

I called a knowledgable source last night. That person was aware of the
change and said that the proper IANA people had been informed in advance
and had (he thought) not disagreed. the change he believed was not for any
of the reasons that paul feared.

As I understand it (and I really don't so you should stop reading now...)
the purpose of locking down the zone files (or whatever) is not
necessarily a power grab by NSI, but rather a move to protect the people
and information who appear in that database (or whatever) from otherwise
nefarious miscreants. Folks who want the file will simply have to register
for it.

I believe information generally wants to be free, but there may be a good
business, technical and socially acceptable case for asking users of the
database to identify themselves.

Also, it's possible NSI got ahead of themselves and locked stuff up
before handing out the keys. What with the move and power grid failures in
Herndon, anything's possible.

has the basic problem that paul vixie complained about been solved?

It doesn't seem to have been solved. g.root-servers.net has lost
those zones.

$ host -t ns crosslink.net g.root-servers.net
crosslink.net NS record currently not present at g.root-servers.net
$ host -t ns army.mil g.root-servers.net
army.mil NS VGR.ARL.army.mil
army.mil NS OCTAGON.TACOM.army.mil
army.mil NS HUACHUCA-AIMS2.army.mil
$ host -t ns netscape.com g.root-servers.net
netscape.com NS record currently not present at g.root-servers.net
$ host -t soa net. g.root-servers.net
net SOA record currently not present at g.root-servers.net
$ host -t soa net. a.root-servers.net
net SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.net hostmaster.INTERNIC.net (
                        1997070201 ;serial (version)
                        10800 ;refresh period (3 hours)
                        900 ;retry interval (15 minutes)
                        604800 ;expire time (1 week)
                        86400 ;default ttl (1 day)
                        )
$ host -t soa net. c.root-servers.net
net SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.net hostmaster.INTERNIC.net (
                        1997062700 ;serial (version)
                        10800 ;refresh period (3 hours)
                        900 ;retry interval (15 minutes)
                        604800 ;expire time (1 week)
                        86400 ;default ttl (1 day)
                        )
$ date
Thu Jul 3 18:22:37 GMT 1997

I called a knowledgable source last night. That person was aware of the
change and said that the proper IANA people had been informed in advance
and had (he thought) not disagreed. the change he believed was not for any
of the reasons that paul feared.

When Paul spoke for millions of users, he did not speak for this one. He
also seems not to have read the message or noted that it claimed to be
addressing a problem for which is is known as a prominent net.nazi (and he
is welcome speak for me in that area).

Then again, NSI has a broad and deep talent for making any act appear to be
infinitely perfidious, no matter how well intentioned.

So now telling what the real story is.

randy