Domainz Website Update - Week Ending 16 May 1999
Joe, I'm pleased that you see this as the right forum and agree that this is a genuine "operational" issue -- hence my posting.
One issue that has been raised before ...a coherent, machine-readable interface ... similar to the whois
We've just run thru an RFI process, as well as sent the consultant to talk with major Registrars, and some smaller ones too. Interestingly enough, only a couple mentioned the need for a "who is" (Andy Linton was one -- better say that before he reminds me). Most saw a need to get access to specific domain name details around the clock. As I undersatnd it, the web interface provides that capability. We were not able to ascertain what additional information requirement there was, and how a "whois" type service provided that additional information. For instance, here is an "eclectic" we use (apologies, but we are not Unix oriented by any means), http://www.mjhb.mdr.ca.us/cgi-bin/dnw.pl?domain=domainz.net http://www.mjhb.mdr.ca.us/cgi-bin/dnw.pl?domain=nominet.org.uk http://www.mjhb.mdr.ca.us/cgi-bin/dnw.pl?domain=ina.com.au The information is broadly comparable with that provided from the .nz Register, http://domainz.waikato.ac.nz/cgi-bin/DNZ-REGISTER?domain_name=clear.net.nz What precisely is it that the Domainz services do not provide that you feel ought to be provided? Is it the content, is it the form in which it is provided? It makes sense to let us know now as we are redeveloping those systems. If there are key aspects of functionality that we do not provide, then we do need to consider how we go about doing that as part of our current exercise.
What are the chances of getting something like this rolled in to your next set of changes?
On the current proposals signalled for next week, little I suspect. These are targetted at specific address content changes and (hopefully) removal of the duality of name holder/billing addresses. (Strong note that this does *not* mean any change to the name holder's ability to appoint a billing agent and be billed indirectly)
Since you're giving as all months of notice...
Did I say that ?-)
there will be plenty of time ... to get a whois server organised, right? :)
As I set out above, if there is a deficiency in the registration services
offered right now and a compelling reason why that gap should be plugged, then
we will certainly consider that as part of the current RFI/RFP process.
Notwithstanding, I guess you've got to put together the case as to where the
deficiency lies, and the benefits in plugging the percieved gap, soon as you
can.
Good to hear from you, and looking forward to further input...
My reagrds,
PAtrick
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 22:28:45 +1200
From: Joe Abley
Certainly I see the NZNOG as a very important forum to "kick the changes" around, and I will welcome any construcive comments that may be forthcoming.
Since this topic does not relate to IP or beer it is probably off topic. Domainz may like to consider establishing a list for ISP's to _subscribe_ to in order to be informed of and discuss the changes you are making.
This sounds very much like an operational issue involving NZ Network Operators, regardless of the fact that it does not directly involve beer. If we're raising hands, then I would very much like to discuss the interface between registrars and Domainz -- and a "heads up" message to this list does far more for me than a bulletin posted somewhere on the www.domainz.net.nz. One issue that has been raised before, and I would like to raise again: it would be good to see a coherent, machine-readable interface to the domain operator's registry, similar to the whois service at whois.internic.net (but not nearly as broken or hard to parse) or perhaps whois.nic.uk. RIPE-181 is a convenient "standard" format. There is a valid operational need to be able to contact the administrative or technical contact for any zone. Concerns about people walking the DNS and pulling down spam-fodder from the server are valid, but IMHO this is no show-stopper, since (a) it's possible with the existing http interface anyway (b) it's not that hard to limit successive queries from the same client What are the chances of getting something like this rolled in to your next set of changes? Since you're giving as all months of notice to re-code our Domainz interfaces, there will be plenty of idle time for Domainz to get a whois server organised, right? :) Joe --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
Hi Patrick, On Tue, May 11, 1999 at 10:28:54AM +1200, Patrick O'Brien wrote:
I'm pleased that you see this as the right forum and agree that this is a genuine "operational" issue -- hence my posting.
One issue that has been raised before ...a coherent, machine-readable interface ... similar to the whois
We've just run thru an RFI process, as well as sent the consultant to talk with major Registrars, and some smaller ones too. Interestingly enough, only a couple mentioned the need for a "who is" (Andy Linton was one -- better say that before he reminds me).
If your consultant came and talked to CLEAR, then his questions didn't filter through to the code monkeys. Maybe we're not a "major Registrar"? Don't know. In any case, as far as I am concerned, a consistent machine-readable interface to the domain contact database is a must if you need to build support systems to handle operational issues (principally security and/or mail issues). For a large proportion of the world, a whois query does the trick. For NZ it doesn't, and although the http interface works fine for ad-hoc queries by humans, the next time the layout of the page is reformatted any automated query tool is liable to fall over.
Most saw a need to get access to specific domain name details around the clock. As I undersatnd it, the web interface provides that capability. We were not able to ascertain what additional information requirement there was, and how a "whois" type service provided that additional information.
Hope that gives you some idea then...
For instance, here is an "eclectic" we use (apologies, but we are not Unix oriented by any means),
% whois -h net.whois-servers.net domainz.net
http://www.mjhb.mdr.ca.us/cgi-bin/dnw.pl?domain=nominet.org.uk
% whois -h uk.whois-servers.net nominet.org.uk
% whois -h au.whois-servers.net ina.com.au
The information is broadly comparable with that provided from the .nz Register,
http://domainz.waikato.ac.nz/cgi-bin/DNZ-REGISTER?domain_name=clear.net.nz
What precisely is it that the Domainz services do not provide that you feel ought to be provided? Is it the content, is it the form in which it is provided?
Spot on. A consistent interface is what is missing.
It makes sense to let us know now as we are redeveloping those systems. If there are key aspects of functionality that we do not provide, then we do need to consider how we go about doing that as part of our current exercise.
I think it would be fairly trivial for you to provide this interface, and I think it would add some value. (I think, in fact, the Waikato guys knocked something suitable up ages ago, but Domainz were not able to decide precisely which fields should have been included, and hence it never went live) For an example of a trivial implementation, try nz.whois-servers.net, which is currently a CNAME to an aged (and noisy) DX2 that lives in my hall at home. The 200 well-spaced lines of shell script that accomplish this are yours to maintain if you'd like them.
As I set out above, if there is a deficiency in the registration services offered right now and a compelling reason why that gap should be plugged, then we will certainly consider that as part of the current RFI/RFP process.
That all sounds highly commercial :) If it would help, I am happy for you to pay me for my 200 lines of shell script :)
Notwithstanding, I guess you've got to put together the case as to where the deficiency lies, and the benefits in plugging the percieved gap, soon as you can.
1. Benefits 1.1. it makes it easier for automated queries, where the results are inserted into other systems 1.2. it makes it easier for operations staff elsewhere in the world to find contact details for NZ domain holders when they need them 1.3. whois is the principal way that domain registration info has been published for years and years, and there are advantages to consistency (in the absense of a pressing reason to change the prevailing whois interface for functionality reasons) 2. Risks 2.1. cost of implementation -- likely very little; there is no significant additional cost to providing a whois interface than any other; a gateway approach is possible in any case which has been demonstrated to be simple to implement. I am hazy on the whole process by which ISPs' requirements for their interface to the registry are actioned and implemented by Domainz. What is the procedure?
Good to hear from you, and looking forward to further input...
You too! Joe --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
Patrick O'Brien wrote:
Joe,
I'm pleased that you see this as the right forum and agree that this is a genuine "operational" issue -- hence my posting.
One issue that has been raised before ...a coherent, machine-readable interface ... similar to the whois
We've just run thru an RFI process, as well as sent the consultant to talk with major Registrars, and some smaller ones too. Interestingly enough, only a couple mentioned the need for a "who is" (Andy Linton was one -- better say that before he reminds me).
I'd note that the registrars you mention aren't always the people who run the networks. Joe and I (and others!) fit into the latter category. I happen to have spent a couple of years being heavily involved on the other side of the fence. I've also been asking for this since 1990 so again it's hardly surprising that I've mentioned it. Given that it's a straightforward task to implement this if we have data in the RIPE-181 format Joe mentions, I'd reiterate my support for a 'whois' type interface for a number of reasons: 1) a command line 'whois' interface is a de facto Internet standard used by a number of large registries around the world e.g. APNIC, RIPE, InterNIC. 2) there is a strong linkage between whois and support for the RIPE-181 (which is probably a more important issue). Domainz should have the ability to produce output in this format for compatability with other registries. Currently Domainz only deals with domain name and person objects in its database. IP number, routing information and AS numbers are potential future additions. The database should be capable of supporting these. andy -- Mailto:asjl(a)netlink.net.nz Post: Netlink, PO Box 5358, Lambton Quay, Wellington, New Zealand -- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
We've just run thru an RFI process, as well as sent the consultant to talk with major Registrars, and some smaller ones too. Interestingly enough, only a couple mentioned the need for a "who is" (Andy Linton was one -- better say that before he reminds me).
<sigh> I most certainly have been asking for WHOIS or similar machine reabible interface for years regards Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2Day Internet Limited http://www.2day.net.nz -/- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
participants (4)
-
2Day Chief Enthusiast -
Andy Linton -
Joe Abley -
Patrick O'Brien