On 26.07 18:10, Rene Wilhelm wrote:
Following NCC#2005070138 and in agreement with SED, I've implemented inverse query support in RISwhois.
Great!
Questions:
- do you agree with the multiline output for -F option ?
I think the -F option is indeed creeping featurism. If someone wants human-readable format they can post-process the easily parseable output to suit their needs. Having said that - I had to - and given that we already have -F for forward queries: If the goal is human-readable output, the line breaks have to be there, don't they?
- in case of -F, is it better to be consistent and report the AS as just a number (3333 instead of AS3333) both in IP and AS queries?
I think consistency is the higher goal here. There is little chance of a single integer being mis-read as a prefix.
P.S. Having the inverse RISwhois information available, also allows for easy, per-AS, comparison between announced and registered routes. For example, AS3320, DTAG:
whois -i origin AS3320 |grep 'route:' |awk '{print $2}' |sort >/tmp/irr
whois -h riswhois -p 4343 -i origin AS3320 |grep 'route:' |awk '{print $2}' |sort >/tmp/ris
diff /tmp/irr /tmp/ris
--> 227 lines of output (26 "diffs")
(another sign registrations in IRR aren't well maintained)
Making this into a script and publishing it is a good idea. Making this available as a CGI on the RIS pages is also good. Daniel