- db-wg - mailman.ripe.net

RIPE Database Requirements Task Force: Final Draft Published
by Bijal Sanghani 26 Oct '21

26 Oct '21

Dear Colleagues, We have now published the final draft of the RIPE Database Requirements Task Force: https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/tf/rdb-requirements-tf/requirements-f… This version takes into account the feedback received from the community on our intermediate draft published in July. Thank you all for providing feedback. Here are the main changes/additions; - Added a word about ENUM and geolocation - Added a section to explain the document structure - Clarified when the historical data was first added to the RIPE Database and when it was made available to users - Rephrased the research purpose and added a separate section Please note that each recommendation will be considered separately by the community and the relevant working groups. Kind regards, Bijal Sanghani For the RIPE Database Requirements Taskforce

3 2

NWI-12 NRTM v4 Solution Definition
by Edward Shryane 19 Oct '21

19 Oct '21

Dear Colleagues, Following the Requirmements Gathering BoF yesterday, I'd like to propose Sasha Romijn's NRTM v4 protocol as a Solution Definition for NWI-12 "NRTM v4". Please see https://github.com/mxsasha/nrtmv4/ for more details and feel free to comment on it. Once this draft proposal is finalised, and if we have consensus from the DB-WG, the RIPE NCC will work on an implementation analysis. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

1 0

Bogon route object cleanup
by Ronald F. Guilmette 08 Oct '21

08 Oct '21

It seems that we never really settled the question of route objects that make reference to the following reserved IP blocks. 192.31.196.0/24 192.88.99.0/24 2001::/32 2002::/16 2011:4188::/48 Note that route objects referring to these IP blocks are *not* present in the route registries of any RIR other than RIPE. I am in favor of including route objects that reference any of these reserved blocks in the ongoing cleanup. My recollection is that Cynthia Revstr�m also expressed support for including any and all such route objects in the current ongoing route object cleanup. Are there any objections at the present time to including such route objects in the ongoing cleanup? Regards, rfg

6 6

RIPE Database Requirements Task Force – Draft Report Published
by Bijal Sanghani 04 Oct '21

04 Oct '21

Dear colleagues, The RIPE Database Requirements Task Force has just published a draft report for your review: https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/tf/rdb-requirements-tf/the-ripe-datab… In this third draft, we’ve added new recommendations and edited our document based on feedback received via emails, survey and during our third BoF in May. Please review this draft and share any comments on the ripe-list before Friday, 13 August 2021. The task force will reconvene in August to discuss the feedback received and work on its final report that will be published ahead of RIPE 83. We look forward to your feedback. Best Regards, Bijal Sanghani

5 9

Two Proposals
by Ronald F. Guilmette 01 Oct '21

01 Oct '21

PROPOSED 1) RIPE NCC shall be tasked to begin updating the following file on a near real-time basis, as number resource assignments are transferred either into or out of the authority of RIPE: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/delegated-ripencc-extended-latest 2) RIPE NCC shall be tasked to begin making the above file available for incremental remote update via the rsync protrocol. RATIONALE Background At the present time the most reliable and up-to-the-minute information indicating which RIR any given number resource is being administered by is contained within the so-called "daily stats files" that are generated and published by the five RIRs: ftp://ftp.arin.net/pub/stats/arin/delegated-arin-extended-latest ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/delegated-ripencc-extended-latest ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/apnic/stats/apnic/delegated-apnic-extended-latest ftp://ftp.lacnic.net/pub/stats/lacnic/delegated-lacnic-extended-latest ftp://ftp.afrinic.net/stats/afrinic/delegated-afrinic-extended-latest Additionally, a single file representing the union of all of the above five files, along with additional data relating to (some but not all) IANA reserved number resources is also available: https://nro-extended-stats-from-rpki-team-prod.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/n… Note however that the data in this (NRO stats) file lags behind the contents of the five RIR daily stats files, and the content of this file is therfore often less fresh and up-to-date than the information contained in the five RIR stats files. Problem Statement (Proposal 1) Because the five RIR stats files are only updated once a day, and at different times for each RIR, and because number resources are, with increasing frequency, being transfered between regions, it is nowadays frequently the case that there will be, in effect, instances of "version skew" between the five RIR stats files. Instance of such inter-RIR stats files version skew can render it impossible to know, based on the stats files, which RIR currently administers a given number resource. Instances of internet-RIR stats file version skew can arise, and in practice they actually do arise as follows: *) RIR 'A' transfers a number resource `R' to RIR `B'. *) RIR `B' records its administration of `R' in its stats file which is then published within 1 hour. *) RIR `A' records the fact that it no longer administers `R' by removing the associated line from its stats file, and RIR `A's stats file is then published 23 hours later. Under the above scenario, the union of all five of the daily RIR stats files will indicate that *both* RIR `A" and also RIR `B' are the responsible RIRs for the resource `R' for a period of 22 hours. An actual example: As of approximately 07:13 (-0700 / PDT) on 2021-09-17 the following blocks were listed in *both* the stats file for ARIN and also the stats file for RIPE: 140.228.32.0/19 140.228.64.0/19 (Evidence indicates that these 2 block have just been transferred from administration by the ARIN region to administration by the RIPE region.) The problem of version skew between the various daily stats files that are currently published by the various RIRs could be largely or entirely eliminated if all five RIRs henceforth began to update these files on a near real-time basis. RIPE can and should begin doing this as an example to the other RIRs, which may then follow suit. Problem Statement (Proposal 2) The RIR daily stats files, including the one that is generated and published by RIPE NCC, consist of plain text files which are themselves composed of a sequence of plain text lines. As a general matter, very few of these lines change, even over time scales as long as a month. Changes to these files, if any, are entirely minimal when viewed over even shorter time scales, e.g. a day or less. The rsync protocol and rsync servers and clients are especially adept at keeping remote copies of exactly such plain text files up-to-date and synchronized with a master copy stored elsewhere on the Internet. They do so while minimizing bandwidth usage by transfering only those portions of a given file that have changed since the last time a local mirrored copy of the file was updated. Publishing RIPE's stats file via rsync would thus be beneficial to all concerned by minimizing bandwidth usage on both the sending and receiving end. Ideally, RIPE NCC could and should take the lead in making its stats file available via rsync. Once it has done so, other RIRs can be encouraged to follow suit and do likewise with their own daily stats files. Regards, rfg P.S. On a personal note I find it nearly unfathomable that these "daily" stats files are being updated and published only once a day. This seems to me almost reminicent of technological solutions considered appropriate in the prior century.

3 5

Upcoming Usability improvements to the RIPE Database Web Search page
by Edward Shryane 01 Oct '21

01 Oct '21

Dear colleagues, In the RIPE NCC's Activity Plan 2021, we planned to make usability improvements to the RIPE database, including the web search feature. My colleague Rehan Syed Muhammad has now published a RIPE Labs article detailing some upcoming improvements: https://labs.ripe.net/author/rehan_syed_muhammad/four-ideas-for-quicker-que… We plan to make incremental changes to the search page in the coming months. We will keep the community informed, and we welcome any feedback. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

1 1

RIPE Database Planning Q4 2021
by Edward Shryane 30 Sep '21

30 Sep '21

Dear colleagues, We are now publishing our quarterly planning for the RIPE Database: https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/db/quarterly-planning Our goals here are to make it clear what we are working on in the coming months, and also to get discussion around those plans so we can make developments based on community input. If you have comments or questions around this, we hope you'll let us know on the list or you can always contact me and the team directly at <ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net>. Kind regards, Ed Shryane Senior Technical Analyst RIPE NCC

2 1

Cosmetic changes to the RIPE Database
by denis walker 19 Sep '21

19 Sep '21

Colleagues There have been a number of cosmetic changes to the RIPE Database in recent months. There is no agreed procedure for making these type of changes. In particular the extent to which the community is informed. Examples of the type of changes we are talking about are: 1/ When the ORGANISATION object addresses were synced with the internal registry the address lines were entered in the wrong order. The RIPE NCC did a cosmetic update to reverse the order of the address lines. It had no operational impact at all. 2/ Capitalisation of status values. Again this had no operational impact at all. We would like some feedback from the community about how you want these type of cosmetic changes announced. We see four possible options: 1/ individual notification in advance to all affected maintainers plus general announcement on the mailing list plus update notifications (full disclosure) 2/ general announcement on the mailing list plus update notifications 3/ general announcement on mailing list and silent update (no notifications) 4/ no announcement, no notifications, just do it without disturbing anyone (totally silent) Some points to note: -In all cases the object history will show the changes. -There is also an option to not change the "last-modified:" attribute if you don't want that to reflect cosmetic changes. -The full disclosure option (1) can sometimes lead to considerable extra work load for the RIPE NCC. If people are individually told in advance of a change they don't always realise it has no operational impact and ask questions. Every question opens a ticket that needs to be manually addressed. -Perhaps options 2 or 3 are the most practical? Your feedback is welcomed... cheers denis co-chair DB-WG

4 5

running in whios-circles...?
by Frank Habicht 18 Sep '21

18 Sep '21

Hi, so on my self-hosted MTA I got an email [unsure about good intentions, thus checking origin] from 82.156.114.62 Whois directed to ripe, ripe said it's iana, iana said it's ripe [ BGP said ..... 4134 23724 45090 ] and ..... there's a route object in APNIC: route: 82.156.0.0/15 origin: AS45090 descr: Tencent Cloud Computing (Beijing) Co., Ltd 309 West Zone, 3F. 49 Zhichun Road. Haidian District. mnt-by: MAINT-TENCENT-CN last-modified: 2020-02-24T07:34:42Z source: APNIC and also "inetnum: 82.156.0.0 - 82.157.255.255" (in APNIC) So, I tend to believe that I'm on the wrong list here, because my question turns out to be: can I trust whois.iana.org ? It seems to tell me something different from what APNIC is saying. PS: a prefix containing IP in question is not seen in https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-recovered-address-space/ipv4-recovere… am i right to be confused by the iana answer? who should get 'encouraged' to change something? Thanks, Frank [frank@fisi ~]$ whoisiana 82.156.114.62 [Querying whois.iana.org] [whois.iana.org] % IANA WHOIS server % for more information on IANA, visit http://www.iana.org % This query returned 1 object refer: whois.ripe.net inetnum: 82.0.0.0 - 82.255.255.255 organisation: RIPE NCC status: ALLOCATED whois: whois.ripe.net changed: 2002-11 source: IANA [frank@fisi ~]$ whois 82.156.114.62 [Querying whois.ripe.net] [whois.ripe.net] % This is the RIPE Database query service. % The objects are in RPSL format. % % The RIPE Database is subject to Terms and Conditions. % See http://www.ripe.net/db/support/db-terms-conditions.pdf % Note: this output has been filtered. % To receive output for a database update, use the "-B" flag. % Information related to '82.156.0.0 - 82.157.255.255' % No abuse contact registered for 82.156.0.0 - 82.157.255.255 inetnum: 82.156.0.0 - 82.157.255.255 netname: NON-RIPE-NCC-MANAGED-ADDRESS-BLOCK descr: IPv4 address block not managed by the RIPE NCC remarks: ------------------------------------------------------ remarks: remarks: For registration information, remarks: you can consult the following sources: remarks: remarks: IANA remarks: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space remarks: http://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry remarks: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-recovered-address-space remarks: remarks: AFRINIC (Africa) remarks: http://www.afrinic.net/ whois.afrinic.net remarks: remarks: APNIC (Asia Pacific) remarks: http://www.apnic.net/ whois.apnic.net remarks: remarks: ARIN (Northern America) remarks: http://www.arin.net/ whois.arin.net remarks: remarks: LACNIC (Latin America and the Carribean) remarks: http://www.lacnic.net/ whois.lacnic.net remarks: remarks: ------------------------------------------------------ country: EU # Country is really world wide admin-c: IANA1-RIPE tech-c: IANA1-RIPE status: ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT created: 2019-01-07T10:49:20Z last-modified: 2019-01-07T10:49:20Z source: RIPE role: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority address: see http://www.iana.org. admin-c: IANA1-RIPE tech-c: IANA1-RIPE nic-hdl: IANA1-RIPE remarks: For more information on IANA services remarks: go to IANA web site at http://www.iana.org. mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-MNT created: 1970-01-01T00:00:00Z last-modified: 2001-09-22T09:31:27Z source: RIPE # Filtered % This query was served by the RIPE Database Query Service version 1.101 (ANGUS) [frank@fisi ~]$

11 28

Re: [db-wg] running in whios-circles...?
by Lutz Donnerhacke 16 Sep '21

16 Sep '21

* Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > Gert Doering <gert(a)space.net> wrote: > >Ideally, IANA should point to the final RIR right away. > > That would certainly be more helpful than the present state of affairs, > within which the IANA WHOIS server is not merely failing to give out > correct referrals, but is actually giving out demonstratably incorrect > referrals. > > Functionally and operationally, the portion of the IANA WHOIS service that > provides referrals for IP addresses is, at present, worse than useless > due to the innumerable incorrect referrals it provides. If IANA does not > wish to correct that, then they should at least configure the thing so that > it will stop providing *any* responses at all when queried about IP > addresses. Did you ever tried to correct wrong entries in the IANA whois? I did and the entries were fixed (within a period of about a year). It's certainly possible to have correct data in the IANA server. OTOH if the problem is serious enough, an IANA review can be triggered.

3 4

What do you think of our new UI?
by Edward Shryane 02 Sep '21

02 Sep '21

Dear colleagues, We have created a short survey to get your feedback and comments on the new user interface (UI) we have deployed across RIPE NCC’s services, including the RIPE DB website. We kindly ask you to take part in the survey and help us improve the user experience for you. You can access the survey at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/RIPENCCservicesUI The survey is anonymous and will remain open until 30 September 2021. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

3 3

"status:" attribute values in the RIPE database
by Edward Shryane 30 Aug '21

30 Aug '21

Dear colleagues, In Remco van Mook's presentation to the Address Policy WG at RIPE 82: "What Colour Is My IP(v4) space? PI Addresses and LIRs", he pointed out that resource "status:" attribute values may not always be all UPPERCASE. This is because the RIPE database is case-insensitive and case preserving in general, meaning a "status:" attribute value is the same regardless of the case. However, this may make parsing this value more difficult as the case should be ignored. Should the DB team implement a rule to always force the "status:" attribute value to uppercase, for consistency? Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

13 24

Bogon Route object update
by Ronald F. Guilmette 26 Aug '21

26 Aug '21

NONAUTH / IPv4: 41.217.128.0/19 37034 2018-09-04 41.217.144.0/20 37034 2018-09-04 41.217.144.0/21 37034 2018-09-04 41.242.128.0/22 327933 2018-09-04 41.242.129.0/24 327933 2018-09-04 41.242.131.0/24 327933 2018-09-04 107.168.204.0/24 47447 2018-09-04 192.31.196.0/24 112 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 1101 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 12816 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 12871 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 15598 2021-02-25 192.88.99.0/24 1741 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 1835 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 20640 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 21416 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 25192 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 25308 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 2847 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29076 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29259 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29432 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29632 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 3243 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 3344 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 35244 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 39326 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 43097 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 50113 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 5408 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 5413 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 680 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 8473 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 8903 2020-11-18 NONAUTH / IPv6: 2001::/32 1101 2018-09-04 2001::/32 12816 2018-09-04 2001::/32 12871 2018-09-04 2001::/32 1741 2018-09-04 2001::/32 21155 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25192 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25308 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25525 2018-09-04 2001::/32 29259 2018-09-04 2001::/32 29432 2018-09-04 2001::/32 44980 2018-09-04 2001::/32 57801 2018-09-04 2001:4:112::/48 112 2018-09-04 2002::/16 1101 2018-09-04 2002::/16 12871 2018-09-04 2002::/16 15598 2021-02-23 2002::/16 1741 2018-09-04 2002::/16 1835 2018-09-04 2002::/16 20640 2018-09-04 2002::/16 21416 2018-09-04 2002::/16 25192 2018-09-04 2002::/16 25308 2018-09-04 2002::/16 2847 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29259 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29432 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29632 2018-09-04 2002::/16 3344 2018-09-04 2002::/16 35244 2018-09-04 2002::/16 39326 2018-09-04 2002::/16 43097 2018-09-04 2002::/16 5413 2018-09-04 2002::/16 559 2018-09-04 2002::/16 680 2018-09-04 2002::/16 8473 2018-09-04 2002::/16 8903 2018-09-04 2011:4188::/48 12880 2018-09-04

2 1

Historical queries
by denis walker 20 Aug '21

20 Aug '21

Colleagues At RIPE 82 during the NWI review, the chairs recommended two changes to the way historical queries for operational data work: 1/ Drop arbitrary restriction of most recent deletion point of re-created objects 2/ Allow access to history of deleted objects that have not been re-created These recommendations are based on positive comments made by the community in recent years. The restrictions were arbitrary at the time historical queries were implemented in the absence of any hard requirements. So if no one objects the chairs will ask the RIPE NCC to do an impact analysis on these changes. cheers denis co-chair DB-WG

2 1

Corrected LIR Organisation "address:" Attribute Values
by Edward Shryane 18 Aug '21

18 Aug '21

Dear Colleagues, Today, Wednesday 18th August, the RIPE NCC updated the "address:" attributes on 1,141 LIR organisation objects. A bug was introduced in a synchronisation script that copied LIR contact details from an internal registry to the RIPE database, which caused the "address:" attributes to be reversed. This bug is fixed, and we have now corrected the affected organisation objects. The maintainers of these organisation objects were notified by email. If you have any questions, please let me know. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

1 0

Smallest IPv4 allocation size (in the RIPE region)?
by Ronald F. Guilmette 18 Aug '21

18 Aug '21

As I understand it, IPv4 route announcement smaller than a /24 do not propagate very well, if at all. I have thus been surprised to see the following blocks listed separately as "allocated" in the daily "stats" file for RIPE. Can anyone explain to me why these small IPv4 blocks are listed in there separately? (Note: I have found no such small blocks in the daily stats files for any of the other four Regional Internet Registries... only RIPE seems to have such things.) 91.227.79.0/25 ripe 91.227.79.128/25 ripe 156.67.6.0/29 ripe 156.67.6.8/29 ripe 156.67.6.16/29 ripe 156.67.6.24/29 ripe 156.67.6.32/29 ripe 156.67.6.40/29 ripe 156.67.6.48/28 ripe 156.67.6.64/26 ripe 156.67.6.128/25 ripe 185.30.232.0/26 ripe 185.30.232.64/26 ripe 185.30.232.128/25 ripe 193.34.192.0/25 ripe 193.34.192.128/25 ripe 193.34.193.0/25 ripe 193.34.195.0/25 ripe 193.34.195.128/25 ripe 193.34.196.0/25 ripe 193.34.197.0/25 ripe 193.34.197.128/25 ripe 193.34.198.0/25 ripe 193.34.198.128/25 ripe 193.34.199.0/25 ripe 193.34.200.0/25 ripe 193.34.200.128/25 ripe 193.34.203.0/25 ripe 193.34.203.128/25 ripe 193.43.0.0/26 ripe 193.43.0.64/27 ripe 193.43.0.96/27 ripe 193.43.0.128/25 ripe 193.58.0.0/27 ripe 193.58.0.32/28 ripe 193.58.0.56/29 ripe 193.58.0.64/26 ripe 193.58.0.128/25 ripe 193.164.232.0/26 ripe 193.164.232.64/27 ripe 193.164.232.160/27 ripe 193.164.232.192/27 ripe 193.188.134.0/26 ripe 193.188.134.64/27 ripe 193.188.134.96/28 ripe 193.188.134.112/29 ripe 193.188.134.120/29 ripe 193.188.134.128/29 ripe 193.188.134.144/28 ripe 193.188.134.160/29 ripe 193.188.134.168/29 ripe 193.188.134.176/28 ripe 193.188.134.192/29 ripe 193.192.12.128/25 ripe 193.201.144.0/25 ripe 193.201.144.128/25 ripe 193.201.145.0/25 ripe 193.201.146.0/25 ripe 193.201.146.128/25 ripe 193.201.147.0/26 ripe 193.201.147.64/27 ripe 193.201.147.96/27 ripe 193.201.147.128/27 ripe 193.201.147.160/27 ripe 193.201.147.224/27 ripe 193.201.148.0/26 ripe 193.201.148.64/26 ripe 193.201.148.192/26 ripe 193.201.149.64/26 ripe 193.201.149.192/26 ripe 193.201.150.0/26 ripe 193.201.150.64/26 ripe 193.201.150.128/26 ripe 193.201.151.0/26 ripe 193.201.151.192/26 ripe 193.201.152.0/25 ripe 193.201.152.128/25 ripe 193.201.154.0/25 ripe 193.201.154.128/25 ripe 193.201.155.128/25 ripe 193.201.156.0/25 ripe 193.201.156.128/25 ripe 193.201.157.0/25 ripe 193.201.159.128/25 ripe 193.218.205.0/26 ripe 193.218.205.64/26 ripe 193.218.205.128/26 ripe 193.218.205.192/27 ripe 193.218.207.0/28 ripe 193.218.207.16/28 ripe 193.218.207.32/27 ripe 193.218.207.80/28 ripe 193.218.207.96/27 ripe 193.218.207.128/25 ripe 193.243.183.64/26 ripe 193.243.183.192/26 ripe 193.254.23.0/25 ripe 193.254.23.128/25 ripe 194.42.47.128/25 ripe 194.42.55.0/27 ripe 194.42.55.32/27 ripe 194.42.55.64/26 ripe 194.42.55.128/27 ripe 194.42.55.160/27 ripe 194.42.55.192/27 ripe 194.42.55.224/27 ripe 194.55.1.0/25 ripe 194.55.1.128/25 ripe 194.93.123.128/25 ripe 194.117.50.128/25 ripe 194.117.52.0/25 ripe 194.117.53.128/25 ripe 194.117.54.0/25 ripe 194.117.54.128/25 ripe 194.117.55.128/25 ripe 194.153.152.0/25 ripe 194.153.152.128/25 ripe 194.153.153.128/25 ripe 194.153.154.0/25 ripe 194.153.154.128/25 ripe 194.153.156.0/26 ripe 194.153.156.64/26 ripe 194.153.156.128/25 ripe 194.153.157.128/27 ripe 194.153.157.160/27 ripe 194.153.157.192/26 ripe 194.153.158.128/25 ripe 194.153.159.0/26 ripe 194.153.159.64/26 ripe 194.153.215.0/25 ripe 194.153.215.128/25 ripe 194.180.159.240/28 ripe 194.180.226.152/29 ripe 194.246.39.96/27 ripe 194.246.39.128/26 ripe 194.246.39.224/27 ripe 195.13.37.0/25 ripe 195.13.46.0/25 ripe 195.13.46.128/25 ripe 195.35.104.32/27 ripe 195.35.104.64/26 ripe 195.35.104.128/25 ripe 195.60.80.96/27 ripe 195.60.80.128/27 ripe 195.60.80.160/27 ripe 195.60.80.192/27 ripe 195.60.80.224/27 ripe 195.60.81.0/26 ripe 195.60.81.64/26 ripe 195.60.81.192/26 ripe 195.60.82.0/26 ripe 195.60.82.64/26 ripe 195.60.82.128/26 ripe 195.60.82.192/26 ripe 195.60.83.0/27 ripe 195.60.83.64/27 ripe 195.60.83.96/27 ripe 195.60.83.160/27 ripe 195.60.83.192/27 ripe 195.60.83.224/27 ripe 195.60.84.0/25 ripe 195.60.85.0/25 ripe 195.60.87.0/25 ripe 195.60.87.128/25 ripe 195.60.89.0/25 ripe 195.60.89.128/25 ripe 195.60.90.0/25 ripe 195.60.90.128/25 ripe 195.60.91.0/25 ripe 195.60.92.0/26 ripe 195.60.92.64/26 ripe 195.60.92.128/26 ripe 195.60.93.0/26 ripe 195.60.93.128/26 ripe 195.60.93.192/26 ripe 195.60.95.0/25 ripe 195.60.95.128/25 ripe

4 5

Update: Bogon Route objects (part 2)
by Ronald F. Guilmette 06 Aug '21

06 Aug '21

There remain a number of route objects in the AUTH data base that refer to bogon AS numbers. I would like to suggest that at the very least these should be moved to NONAUTH, but preferably deleted altogether. Use of bogon AS numbers should neither be condoned nor assisted by any RIR. I mean what is the point of having RIRs if people are just going to use whatever numbers they want, willy nilly, and without formal assignments? Also, the overwhelming majority of these route objects do not correspond to active route announcements anyway, and thus deleting them would provably have -no- operational significance. Examples: https://bgp.he.net/AS198738 https://bgp.he.net/AS8295 https://bgp.he.net/AS36879 https://bgp.he.net/AS31419 https://bgp.he.net/AS46723 ... AUTH / IPv4 (80): ----------------- 5.1.112.0/24 198738 2012-05-16 5.1.113.0/24 198738 2012-05-16 5.160.196.0/24 62280 2014-05-10 5.160.197.0/24 62280 2014-05-10 5.160.240.0/24 62280 2014-11-02 5.160.241.0/24 62280 2014-11-02 45.8.92.0/24 397796 2020-06-11 45.8.92.0/24 46723 2020-06-11 45.8.93.0/24 46723 2020-05-26 45.8.94.0/24 397796 2020-05-26 45.8.94.0/24 46723 2020-05-26 45.8.95.0/24 397796 2020-05-26 45.8.95.0/24 46723 2020-05-26 45.14.212.0/22 2209013 2019-05-09 45.95.0.0/24 46723 2020-06-11 45.95.1.0/24 46723 2020-06-11 45.95.2.0/24 46723 2020-06-11 45.95.3.0/24 46723 2020-05-30 77.246.74.0/24 37631 2015-05-29 81.52.165.0/24 36879 2013-10-01 81.52.166.0/24 36879 2013-10-02 81.52.167.0/24 36879 2013-10-02 81.52.168.0/24 36879 2013-10-02 81.52.169.0/24 36879 2013-10-02 82.98.78.0/24 394935 2016-10-26 83.136.64.0/21 8871 2020-12-29 83.216.160.0/19 31419 2011-01-03 83.216.160.0/20 31419 2011-01-03 83.216.160.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 83.216.168.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 83.216.176.0/20 31419 2011-01-03 83.216.176.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 83.216.184.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.128.0/19 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.128.0/20 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.128.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.136.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.144.0/20 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.144.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 86.110.152.0/21 31419 2011-01-03 91.102.168.0/21 8295 2006-11-17 91.102.168.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.169.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.170.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.171.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.172.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.173.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.174.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.102.175.0/24 8295 2020-02-25 91.107.84.0/24 202532 2019-07-08 91.220.83.0/24 46414 2010-10-28 93.92.104.0/22 1975505 2018-12-12 141.98.12.0/24 208469 2020-03-25 158.255.59.0/24 203655 2015-11-27 185.18.88.0/23 196803 2019-09-18 185.48.220.0/22 199724 2014-03-05 185.62.220.0/22 1975505 2018-12-12 185.62.221.0/24 1975505 2018-12-12 185.106.44.0/24 200968 2015-06-29 185.148.136.0/22 198738 2019-07-08 185.148.138.0/23 198738 2016-09-12 185.164.160.0/22 14076 2016-11-02 185.194.4.0/22 205740 2020-04-05 185.200.32.0/22 33431 2017-06-13 185.225.136.0/22 33431 2017-10-13 185.244.144.0/22 204634 2018-02-02 185.250.112.0/22 20180320 2019-07-25 188.92.121.0/24 40178 2020-04-01 193.33.110.0/23 42796 2012-06-28 193.110.94.0/24 16712 2021-03-18 193.135.119.0/24 46723 2020-05-30 193.201.204.0/24 14880 2007-11-23 193.201.205.0/24 14880 2007-11-23 194.99.204.0/22 36895 2006-05-04 194.165.87.0/24 21389 2012-12-10 194.201.253.0/24 25568 2014-04-08 212.68.170.0/23 20873 2013-12-20 213.156.70.0/24 20873 2005-09-06 213.156.71.0/24 20873 2005-09-06 213.228.244.0/24 31453 2005-01-04 AUTH / IPv6 (19): ----------------- 2001:678:d44:100::/64 999998 2021-02-13 2001:678:d44:200::/64 999999 2021-02-13 2a00:9700:1::/48 47497 2017-01-14 2a00:e640::/32 198738 2012-04-26 2a01:9ba0::/32 199724 2014-03-05 2a03:1960::/32 201400 2017-07-24 2a03:9c00:f::/48 210323 2019-12-18 2a03:b600::/29 46723 2019-03-14 2a07:7e40:1::/48 34676 2020-07-28 2a09:be40:3620::/48 208577 2019-08-15 2a09:f700::/29 46723 2019-03-06 2a0a:7740::/48 46076 2020-10-30 2a0b:1040::/29 31005 2017-06-04 2a0b:3e00::/32 14076 2016-11-02 2a0b:4340:a0:3ec::/64 139734 2020-03-18 2a0d:1a40:faf::/48 138987 2020-06-13 2a0e:aa07:f030::/44 132352 2019-04-26 2a0e:b107:680::/48 140540 2020-04-02 2a10:cc46:100::/44 655312 2021-06-03

3 4

Update: Bogon Route objects
by Ronald F. Guilmette 05 Aug '21

05 Aug '21

It would appear that we may have acquired a few new bogon route objects within 41/8 which I believe is 100% AFRINIC space. I can only guess that this is most likely due to some fresh reclamations recently performed by AFRINIC. Note that I am still including the questionable routes relating to the 192.31.196.0/24 and 192.88.99.0/24 blocks which have been discussed here previously, as well as some of the IPv6 routes that some people have also suggested should fall into the "questionable" category. (If I could get some further clarity on RIPE NCC's official position on the questionable bits, that would be helpful.) NONAUTH / IPv4: --------------- 41.217.128.0/19 37034 2018-09-04 41.217.144.0/20 37034 2018-09-04 41.217.144.0/21 37034 2018-09-04 192.31.196.0/24 112 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 1101 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 12816 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 12871 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 15598 2021-02-25 192.88.99.0/24 1741 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 1835 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 20640 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 21416 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 25192 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 25308 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 2847 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29076 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29259 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29432 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29632 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 3243 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 3344 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 35244 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 39326 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 43097 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 50113 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 5408 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 5413 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 680 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 8473 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 8903 2020-11-18 NONAUTH / IPv6: --------------- 2001::/32 1101 2018-09-04 2001::/32 12816 2018-09-04 2001::/32 12871 2018-09-04 2001::/32 1741 2018-09-04 2001::/32 21155 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25192 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25308 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25525 2018-09-04 2001::/32 29259 2018-09-04 2001::/32 29432 2018-09-04 2001::/32 44980 2018-09-04 2001::/32 57801 2018-09-04 2001:4:112::/48 112 2018-09-04 2002::/16 1101 2018-09-04 2002::/16 12871 2018-09-04 2002::/16 15598 2021-02-23 2002::/16 1741 2018-09-04 2002::/16 1835 2018-09-04 2002::/16 20640 2018-09-04 2002::/16 21416 2018-09-04 2002::/16 25192 2018-09-04 2002::/16 25308 2018-09-04 2002::/16 2847 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29259 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29432 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29632 2018-09-04 2002::/16 3344 2018-09-04 2002::/16 35244 2018-09-04 2002::/16 39326 2018-09-04 2002::/16 43097 2018-09-04 2002::/16 5413 2018-09-04 2002::/16 559 2018-09-04 2002::/16 680 2018-09-04 2002::/16 8473 2018-09-04 2002::/16 8903 2018-09-04 2011:4188::/48 12880 2018-09-04

2 1

Bogon cleanup -- Current anomalies
by Ronald F. Guilmette 24 Jul '21

24 Jul '21

According to information given to me by Edward Shryane <eshryane(a)ripe.net>, the cleanup of bogon route objects which made reference to bogon IP address space should have been completed the night before last. My latest analysis suggests that a few such route objects escaped the net and are still present within the NONAUTH data base. These route objects are summarized below. I'd appreciate it if others would take a look at these and tell me if they think that these route objects should or should not be present within the data base. Note that both batches of bogon routes given below are really rather curious due to the fact that nearly all of the routes have the exact same last-modified date (2018-09-04) and a great many of them refer either to the 192.88.99.0/24 IPv4 block, which is apparently reserved by RFC 3068, or to some IPv6 block which is *not* clearly related to RFC 3068. I am frankly not sure what to make of any of these, but I do suspect that they are all invalid, because no RIR has assigned any of the relevant IP space to any resource member. NONAUTH / IPv4 routes (36): --------------------------- 41.217.128.0/19 37034 2018-09-04 41.217.144.0/20 37034 2018-09-04 41.217.144.0/21 37034 2018-09-04 41.242.84.0/22 37609 2018-09-04 170.56.0.0/16 15854 2018-09-04 170.56.0.0/16 702 2018-09-04 192.31.196.0/24 112 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 1741 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29259 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 2847 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 12816 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 3344 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 20640 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 5408 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 1835 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 8473 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 15598 2021-02-25 192.88.99.0/24 1101 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 12871 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 680 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 25192 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 35244 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 39326 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 5413 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 25308 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 3243 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29076 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29632 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 8903 2020-11-18 192.88.99.0/24 21416 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 43097 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 29432 2018-09-04 192.88.99.0/24 50113 2018-09-04 192.107.242.0/24 394784 2018-09-04 204.144.127.0/24 40142 2018-09-04 205.166.145.0/24 394784 2018-09-04 NONAUTH / IPv6 routes (37): --------------------------- 2001::/32 1101 2018-09-04 2001::/32 12816 2018-09-04 2001::/32 12871 2018-09-04 2001::/32 1741 2018-09-04 2001::/32 21155 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25192 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25308 2018-09-04 2001::/32 25525 2018-09-04 2001::/32 29259 2018-09-04 2001::/32 29432 2018-09-04 2001::/32 44980 2018-09-04 2001::/32 57801 2018-09-04 2001:4:112::/48 112 2018-09-04 2002::/16 1101 2018-09-04 2002::/16 12871 2018-09-04 2002::/16 15598 2021-02-23 2002::/16 1741 2018-09-04 2002::/16 1835 2018-09-04 2002::/16 20640 2018-09-04 2002::/16 21416 2018-09-04 2002::/16 25192 2018-09-04 2002::/16 25308 2018-09-04 2002::/16 2847 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29259 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29432 2018-09-04 2002::/16 29632 2018-09-04 2002::/16 3344 2018-09-04 2002::/16 35244 2018-09-04 2002::/16 39326 2018-09-04 2002::/16 43097 2018-09-04 2002::/16 5413 2018-09-04 2002::/16 559 2018-09-04 2002::/16 680 2018-09-04 2002::/16 8473 2018-09-04 2002::/16 8903 2018-09-04 2011:4188::/48 12880 2018-09-04 2c0f:f260::/32 36924 2018-09-04

7 16

consensus on AS23456
by denis walker 13 Jul '21

13 Jul '21

Colleagues Whilst part of the discussion continues, there does seem to be a consensus on adding AS23456 to the reserved list maintained by the RIPE NCC. This would prevent anyone creating a ROUTE(6) object with AS23456 as the origin. The chairs also recognise the consensus to not delete or modify any set objects that reference AS23456. This is in line with past views not to purge set objects when an AUT-NUM object is deleted for any reason. The chairs therefore ask the RIPE NCC to add AS23456 to the RIPE Database reserved list. Regards William & denis co-chairs DB-WG

3 2

Re: [db-wg] Further cleanup (was: RIPE NONAUTH route(6) objects
by Ronald F. Guilmette 13 Jul '21

13 Jul '21

Job Snijders <job(a)sobornost.net> wrote: >Should the database server software impose brittle restrictions >on that field? No, not worth the headache. I never suggested any changes to the data base software. I have merely suggested that *existing* route objects that make reference to bogon ASNs should be deleted from the data base, just as is already and currently being done in the case of those route objects that make reference to bogon IP space. The overwhelming majority of these "bogon-ASN" route objects are quite obviously leftovers that just never got cleaned up... some having languished unattended in the data base for as much as 20 years or more (and even some of the people who put those there originally are no doubt dead by now). We are in agreement in our (idealistic?) hops that someday RPKI will make all of these issues moot. By for today, there is no good reason not to remove the decades long accumulation of rust. It isn't doing anybody any good, and I fear it is an active enticement to mischief makers, of which the Internet has an over-supply these days. Regards, rfg

4 7

RIPE NONAUTH route(6) objects using unregistered space cleanup - deployment *today*
by Edward Shryane 08 Jul '21

08 Jul '21

Dear colleagues, The implementation of the cleanup of RIPE NONAUTH route(6) objects using unregistered space is now complete, we plan to deploy to production *today*. This means that the cleanup job will run for the first time tonight. * Each night, all RIPE NONAUTH route(6) objects with an unregistered prefix ("available" or "reserved" in delegated stats) are selected. * If a prefix remains unregistered for 1 week, notify the maintainers of any related route(6) objects. * The maintainer can ask to make an exception, not to delete a route(6) object. * Otherwise, after a further 2 weeks, delete the route(6) objects. See the solution definition for more details: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2021-March/006876.html Note for now, the AS origin status is *not* considered. Please discuss further whether this should be included. If you have any feedback, please let us know. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

9 31

Whois Release 1.101
by Edward Shryane 01 Jul '21

01 Jul '21

Dear Working Group, RIPE Database release 1.101 has been deployed to the Release Candidate environment. We plan to deploy to production on Thursday 1st July. This release includes the following main changes: * Switch RIPE database to UTC timezone (all timestamps will be in UTC and all timestamps specify the 'Z' timezone) * Display an error on NRTM if client is blocked by ACL limit (#812) * Added rewrite rules to embedded Jetty (#801) * RDAP nameserver queries always return Not Implemented (#811) * Updated dependencies *Additionally* some operational changes will also be made to the production environment on 1st July: * Remove support for TLS versions 1.0 and 1.1 on HTTPS connections * The IETF has formally deprecated these TLS versions, now only versions 1.2 and 1.3 are recommended. * Remove insecure TLS cipher algorithms * TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_CAMELLIA_128_CBC_SHA * TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA * TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA * TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA * TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA * Remove HTTP redirects for whois.ripe.net and www.db.ripe.net * HTTP requests to these hosts will no longer redirect to https://apps.db.ripe.net but will return 400 Bad Request. * Remove HTTP redirects for the legacy Whois REST API * The legacy Whois REST API was retired in 2015, a temporary redirect to https://rest.db.ripe.net will be removed. * HTTP requests to the legacy API at http://apps.db.ripe.net/whois/lookup/ripe will return 400 Bad Request. Please check your Whois client in case you are affected by these changes. The release notes are on the website: https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/db/release-notes/ripe-database-rel… More information on the Release Candidate environment can be found on our website: https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/db/release-notes/rc-release-candid… Please let us know if you find any issues with this release in the RC environment. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC

1 1

Removie ALL bogus route objects from BOTH data bases
by Ronald F. Guilmette 21 Jun '21

21 Jun '21

I guess I'll try this again, since I don't recall seeing either any ascent nor any pushback the last time I tried to raise this point here. Al long as those bogus route objects that refer to bogon IP address space are being removed from the data, why not also remove all of the equally bogus route objects that refer to bogon AS numbers? I hope that I'm not actually the only one who sees the wisdom in cleaning up the whole mess that currently exists in the RIPE data bases. There are, at present, on the order of about 80 or so bogus route objects in the "regular" data base that refer to bogon AS numbers, and there are, give or take, about 1,500 of such bogus route objects currently within the (separate) RIPE-NONAUTH data base. Is anyone passionately in favor of keeping all of this useless and potentially fraudlent or misleading garbage in the data base? If not, then why not clear it all out? I mean seriously, the RIRs data bases are *supposed* to be the definitive guides to who has what and who may use what. And yet RIPE is, in effect, tacitly -appproving- of the use of bogon AS numbers. So I need to ask: Why? Regards, rfg

1 0

Removal of bogon route objects
by Ronald F. Guilmette 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

Friends, As previously discussed, the decision was made awhile back to remove from the data base all RIPE-NONAUTH route objects which refer to currently unallocated IP space: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2021-May/006952.html In recent days I stumbled upon one such object that was still present in the data base. Upon seeing that object, I necessarily assumed that it was most likely not a "one off", and that it probably had siblings. In the spirit of trying to help out, and after a fair bit of fooling around on my part, I managed to concoct a rather simple method for finding all such bogon route objects that remain in the data base, and I wrote a small Perl script to do that exact thing. A copy of the script may be obtained here, for anyone who may be interested: https://pastebin.com/raw/LsvZ05tX Notes: *) The script assumes the presence of two external programs and their presence on the user's current $PATH, i.e. the widely used wget progarm, and also John Levine's version of a thing called grepcidr, sources for which may be obtained here: https://github.com/jrlevine/grepcidr3 *) The initial line of the script may have to be adjusted depending on the location, in the filesystem, of your local Perl interpreter. *) The script computes its results based upon the following two input data files, both of which are automagically fetched by the script using wget: https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/delegated-stats/nro-extended-stats ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/ripe-nonauth.db.gz (It is my understanding that each of these is updated on a daily basis.) *) The script DOES NOT verify that the entirety of any given RIPE-NONAUTH route object in fact refers to bogon space. Rather the script only checks to see whether or not the first IPv4 address of each current RIPE-NONAUTH route object does or does not refer to current bogon space. If it does, then the entire IPv4 CIDR of the route object is printed to stdout. *) Assuming that the script is installed as "ripebogonroutes" and in one's path, it may be invoked simply as: ripebogonroutes > bogon-route-cidrs *) At present there are 55,964 RIPE-NONAUTH objects in the data base. Of these, the first address of 857 of them refers to current bogon space. It is my fervent hope that the corresponding RIPE-NONAUTH route objects will be removed from the data base as soon as reasonably practical. Regards, rfg

6 18