[192473] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Another day,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Smith)
Fri Oct 28 22:45:45 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Michael Smith <mksmith@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 19:45:40 -0700
In-reply-to: <21691.1477697805@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I would use LACNIC=E2=80=99s whois server for these queries. They have =
info from all the registries, which is an amazing service that seems =
beyond the other RIRs.=20
whois -h whois.lacnic.net <http://whois.lacnic.net/> 103.11.67.105
HostUS HOSTUS-IPV4-5 (NET-103-11-64-0-1) 103.11.64.0 - 103.11.67.255
Gaiacom, L.C. SOLVPS-103-11-67-0-24 (NET-103-11-67-0-1) 103.11.67.0 - =
103.11.67.255
Mike
> On Oct 28, 2016, at 4:36 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette =
<rfg@tristatelogic.com> wrote:
>=20
>=20
> In message =
<CADVNyRb-LE2GAgxae149RUwz5fkzQh-9Es6ZcEg_e0N7LVDa9g@mail.gmail.com>
> Doug Clements <dclements@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
>> How does one get ARIN to register resources to come up with this =
result?
>>=20
>> https://whois.arin.net/rest/nets;q=3D103.11.67.105
>>=20
>> The /16 is APNIC but there are 2 subnets that appear to be allocated =
from
>> ARIN. Having just typed 'whois 103.11.67.105' I completely missed the =
fact
>> that the supernet was APNIC until I checked the web interface.
>=20
> Oh!! Wow!! I totally missed this also, i.e. that ARIN is showing an
> allocation for 103.11.64.0/22 to HostUs.Us in Texas.
>=20
> That's really weird, but even that doesn't either explain or excuse
> what still looks like an illicit squat (by an unrelated Los Angeles
> company) on the 103.11.67.0/24 block to me... perhaps one that's been
> re-sold to a spammer (which seems possible, given the spam I got).
>=20
> In my own defense, I didn't see the ARIN allocation because I have a
> normative process that I use for looking up IP addresses. It's
> hierarchical, and I always start with whatver whois.iana.org has to
> say. And it says that that 103.0.0.0/8 belongs to APNIC, so of =
course,
> I only looked at what whois.apnic.net had to say about 103.11.67.105.
> And it says that it's unallocated. (And apparently, data shown for
> announced prefixes on the bgp.he.net web site is also obtained in this
> same straightforward way, because it also is showing 103.11.67.0/24 as
> registered to "Asia Pacific Network Information Centre".)
>=20
> This isn't the first time I've wished that the right hand knew (or =
cared)
> what the left hand was doing. I've asked the folks at IANA about this
> sort of thing in the past, i.e. them giving pointers to the apparently
> wrong RiR whois server, and they just won't fix it. They just shrug =
and
> say "Not our problem man!" And in this case, maybe they're right. If
> APNIC gave two subparts of 103/8 to ARIN, it might have been helpful
> if their own whois server was made aware of that fact.
>=20
> Sigh. I have to keep reminding myself of what one friend of mine =
keeps
> on telling me... "Ron, there you go again, trying to think about these
> things logically."
>=20
>=20
> Regards,
> rfg
