Leo Vegoda wrote:

Hi Reza,

You wrote:

...

Based on my research, I noticed that [inetnum: 212.86.64.0 - 212.86.79.255] does not have any valid contact e-mail listed. The two contact e-mail addresses that appear both have changed:

changed: shakeri@gmail.com 20100605 changed: mohammadhaeri@gmail.com 20100521

"changed: xxxx...." lines do NOT indicate that the email addresses have changed, but rather that an update has been submitted by an individual that can be reached by using *this* email address. Reza, may I suggest that you have a look at the RIPE-DB documentation?

...

Would it be possible to ask this network to provide valid contact e-mail address(s)?

You could call them and ask at the number provided. But it is worth noting that this is an assignment and there is plenty of contact information in the inetnum object for the allocation. You can look up the hierarchy using the -L query flag. Sadly, it doesn't appear to be available from the web whois interface.

Actually, it is. The string to enter in the web interface, in the input box is: -BL 212.86.64.0 - 212.86.79.255 or alternatively, you should be able to select the -L or -l from the "Advanced Search Form" interface. But it looks like over there it is not offered on a simple point-n-click basis ;-) Nevertheless, each individual flag option can be requested explicitely in the input field of the web-inerface.

Hope this helps.

Leo

Regards, Wilfried (Co-Chair RIPE DB-WG)

isnt it a good test case for having IRT object in RIPE db as well. Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org>wrote:

All,

...

Actually, it is. The string to enter in the web interface, in the input box is:

-BL 212.86.64.0 - 212.86.79.255

or alternatively, you should be able to select the -L or -l from the "Advanced Search Form" interface.

But it looks like over there it is not offered on a simple point-n-click basis ;-) Nevertheless, each individual flag option can be requested explicitely in

On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 19:45 +0000, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote: the

...

input field of the web-inerface.

I tried the "Abuse Finder" tool for this and it didn't seem to help:

http://lab.db.ripe.net/portal/abuse-finder.htm

The heuristics are described here:

http://labs.ripe.net/Members/Paul_P_/content-updated-heuristics-abuse-finder...

Maybe it makes sense to have some fallback to non-abuse-specific contacts (admin-c/tech-c) if no abuse contacts have been defined? Perhaps with a warning that no actual abuse contacts have been registered....

-- Shane

Hi Tobias, Nice to see that. I wasn't following the task force working (my bad). IRT is not a perfect solution because you can't guarantee if the address provided is active or not. Most of the times the email boxes are full and we get bounce response. But anyhow most of the times if works. anyways, best of luck. Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Tobias Knecht <tk@abusix.com> wrote:

Am 10.05.11 12:15, schrieb Aftab Siddiqui:

...

isnt it a good test case for having IRT object in RIPE db as well.

Absolutely right. There is already a TaskForce in place to discuss the possibilities. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/tf/abuse-contact

Thanks,

Tobias