[31837] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: DOS Attacks and reliable network contact data.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brian Wallingford)
Sun Oct 22 23:20:54 2000
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 23:18:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Wallingford <brian@meganet.net>
To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Cc: Joe Shaw <jshaw@insync.net>, Jason Slagle <raistlin@tacorp.net>,
nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <200010230047.AAA00352@vacation.karoshi.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10010222312210.10235-100000@cerise>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At the risk of sounding entirely un-politically correct, is it possible to
query whois.nic.ad.jp for actual contact information, vs. just company
name? Color me frustrated, but, even with the "/e" extension, nic.ad.jp
has been nearly useless for many moons. This strikes me as somewhat
irresponsible.
: Which JPNIC block? The original JPNIC delegation was from SRI,
: predating NSI, APNIC and ARIN. And no, there is no standard for
: whois data that is published, let alone publishing at all.
: >
: > Ah, now I see the issue. That's insanely sparse on the
: > information. Since I'm really quite ignorant in the area, who gives JPNIC
: > the power to assign netblocks? APNIC I presume, after checking with
: > APNIC's whois database. I guess there's no policy for standards and the
: > like. How do things like standards get enforced amongst registry entities
: > outside the US?
: >
: > --
: > Joseph W. Shaw - jshaw@insync.net
: > Sr. Security Specialist for <Big company not to be named>.
: >
: > On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Jason Slagle wrote:
: >
: > > Yes, but even geektools falls flat on it's face for lets say
: > > 210.251.128.255.
: > >
: > > :sigh: I really wish we could get a common format for these.
: > >
: > > I really like the ripe style databases.
