From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Wed Feb 2 11:47:18 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA14710 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 11:47:16 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id IAA03488 for rps-outgoing; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 08:23:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id IAA03483 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 08:22:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from rs2.arin.net (rs2.arin.net [192.149.252.22]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id IAA00301 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 08:23:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from ops.arin.net (ops.arin.net [192.149.252.141]) by rs2.arin.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA13048 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 11:23:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from orr.arin.net (orr.arin.net [192.149.252.201]) by ops.arin.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id LAA08526 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 11:23:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (raminr@localhost) by orr.arin.net (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id LAA15231 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 11:23:17 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: orr.arin.net: raminr owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 11:23:17 -0500 (EST) From: Ramin Sepehr Rad To: rps@ISI.EDU Subject: comments in RPSL Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list RFC 2622 has this to say about comments in RPSL: An object's description may contain comments. A comment can be anywhere in an object's definition, it starts at the first "#" character on a line and ends at the first end-of-line character. White space characters can be used to improve readability. But does this mean that when an object is registered in a repository, the comments should be removed? My take is that a comment is for human, and should be ignored by a language compiler/interpreter. So an object in a routing registry may contain comments, but the RPSL interpreters which query the registries should ignore comments. So if I submit the following maintainer object: mntner: MNT-RAMINR descr: 4506 Daly Drive, Suite #200 descr: Chantilly, VA ... it should NOT be registered in the repository as: mntner: MNT-RAMINR descr: 4506 Daly Drive, Suite descr: Chantilly, VA ... It should be registered exactly the way it was submitted. One implementation of a routing registry software that we have here is removing comments from the objects. I don't know, yet, how BIRD behaves. -ramin ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | Ramin Sepehr Rad American Registry for Internet Numbers | | raminr@arin.net 4506 Daly Drive | | (703) 227-9876 Suite 200 | | (703) 227-0676 (FAX) Chantilly, VA 20151 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Wed Feb 2 12:57:48 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16900 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:57:46 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id JAA06066 for rps-outgoing; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:39:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id JAA06061 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:39:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from cat.isi.edu (cat.isi.edu [128.9.160.205]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id JAA07677; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:39:36 -0800 (PST) Received: (from cengiz@localhost) by cat.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA24897; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:39:34 -0800 From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14488.27606.449199.667087@cat.isi.edu> Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:39:34 -0800 (PST) To: Ramin Sepehr Rad Cc: rps@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: comments in RPSL In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.71 under 21.1 (patch 3) "Acadia" XEmacs Lucid Reply-to: cengiz@ISI.EDU X-Organisation: USC / Information Sciences Institute X-Phone: +1 (310) 822 1511 x219 X-Fax: +1 (310) 823 6714 Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ramin Sepehr Rad (raminr@arin.net) on February 2: > > RFC 2622 has this to say about comments in RPSL: > > An object's description may contain comments. A comment can be > anywhere in an object's definition, it starts at the first "#" > character on a line and ends at the first end-of-line character. > White space characters can be used to improve readability. > > But does this mean that when an object is registered in a repository, the > comments should be removed? No, it should not be removed. If it was to be removed, it would not have been part of a standard. > > My take is that a comment is for human, and should be ignored by a language > compiler/interpreter. So an object in a routing registry may contain comments, > but the RPSL interpreters which query the registries should ignore comments. > > So if I submit the following maintainer object: > > mntner: MNT-RAMINR > descr: 4506 Daly Drive, Suite #200 > descr: Chantilly, VA > ... > > it should NOT be registered in the repository as: > > mntner: MNT-RAMINR > descr: 4506 Daly Drive, Suite > descr: Chantilly, VA > ... > > It should be registered exactly the way it was submitted. > exactly. > One implementation of a routing registry software that we have here is > removing comments from the objects. > > I don't know, yet, how BIRD behaves. > It stores the object the way it was submitted. > -ramin > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > | Ramin Sepehr Rad American Registry for Internet Numbers | > | raminr@arin.net 4506 Daly Drive | > | (703) 227-9876 Suite 200 | > | (703) 227-0676 (FAX) Chantilly, VA 20151 | > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Cengiz -- Cengiz Alaettinoglu Information Sciences Institute http://www.isi.edu/~cengiz University of Southern California From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Wed Feb 2 14:00:47 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA18217 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 14:00:44 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id KAA08438 for rps-outgoing; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 10:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id KAA08013 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 10:25:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from backin5.merit.edu (backin5.merit.edu [198.108.60.28]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id KAA12904 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 10:26:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by backin5.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 8975) id B4D5AA9507; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 13:25:59 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: comments in RPSL To: raminr@arin.net (Ramin Sepehr Rad) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 13:25:59 -0500 (EST) Cc: rps@ISI.EDU In-Reply-To: from "Ramin Sepehr Rad" at Feb 02, 2000 11:23:17 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20000202182559.B4D5AA9507@backin5.merit.edu> From: gerald@merit.edu (Gerald Andrew Winters) Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ramin, Just to be clear I would like to add that the application which you are using is not irrd. Irrd conforms to spec and does not remove comments from the object. Actually I can resist pointing out that removing comments from the object is useless, isn't it? Because why would one put in comments in the object in the first place? That would mean the comments would only exist for a short period in transit from the user to the DB. --jerry > > > RFC 2622 has this to say about comments in RPSL: > > An object's description may contain comments. A comment can be > anywhere in an object's definition, it starts at the first "#" > character on a line and ends at the first end-of-line character. > White space characters can be used to improve readability. > > But does this mean that when an object is registered in a repository, the > comments should be removed? > > My take is that a comment is for human, and should be ignored by a language > compiler/interpreter. So an object in a routing registry may contain comments, > but the RPSL interpreters which query the registries should ignore comments. > > So if I submit the following maintainer object: > > mntner: MNT-RAMINR > descr: 4506 Daly Drive, Suite #200 > descr: Chantilly, VA > ... > > it should NOT be registered in the repository as: > > mntner: MNT-RAMINR > descr: 4506 Daly Drive, Suite > descr: Chantilly, VA > ... > > It should be registered exactly the way it was submitted. > > One implementation of a routing registry software that we have here is > removing comments from the objects. > > I don't know, yet, how BIRD behaves. > > -ramin > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > | Ramin Sepehr Rad American Registry for Internet Numbers | > | raminr@arin.net 4506 Daly Drive | > | (703) 227-9876 Suite 200 | > | (703) 227-0676 (FAX) Chantilly, VA 20151 | > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Fri Feb 11 15:47:05 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA19862 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:46:58 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id MAA11233 for rps-outgoing; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:25:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA10699 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:13:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from ISI.EDU (jet.isi.edu [128.9.160.87]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA14866; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:13:17 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200002112013.MAA14866@boreas.isi.edu> To: IETF-Announce: ; Subject: RFC 2769 on Routing Policy System Replication Cc: rfc-ed@ISI.EDU, rps@ISI.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary=NextPart Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:13:17 -0800 From: RFC Editor Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list --NextPart A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 2769 Title: Routing Policy System Replication Author(s): C. Villamizar, C. Alaettinoglu, R. Govindan, D. Meyer Status: Standards Track Date: February 2000 Mailbox: curtis@avici.com, cengiz@ISI.EDU, govindan@ISI.EDU, dmm@cisco.com Pages: 42 Characters: 95255 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rps-dist-06.txt URL: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2769.txt The RIPE database specifications and RPSL define languages used as the basis for representing information in a routing policy system. A repository for routing policy system information is known as a routing registry. A routing registry provides a means of exchanging information needed to address many issues of importance to the operation of the Internet. The implementation and deployment of a routing policy system must maintain some degree of integrity to be of any use. The Routing Policy System Security RFC [3] addresses the need to assure integrity of the data by proposing an authentication and authorization model. This document addresses the need to distribute data over multiple repositories and delegate authority for data subsets to other repositories without compromising the authorization model established in Routing Policy System Security RFC. This document is a product of the Routing Policy System Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution.echo Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the RFCs. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="RFC-INFO@RFC-EDITOR.ORG" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <000211120720.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> RETRIEVE: rfc DOC-ID: rfc2769 --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="rfc2769.txt"; site="ftp.isi.edu"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="in-notes" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <000211120720.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Fri Feb 11 16:08:07 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20775 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 16:08:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id MAA12164 for rps-outgoing; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:47:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA12159 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from cat.isi.edu (cat.isi.edu [128.9.160.205]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA01352; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:47:44 -0800 (PST) Received: (from cengiz@localhost) by cat.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA17635; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:47:43 -0800 From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14500.30063.465308.566109@cat.isi.edu> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:47:43 -0800 (PST) To: rps@ISI.EDU Subject: WG Status X-Mailer: VM 6.71 under 21.1 (patch 3) "Acadia" XEmacs Lucid Reply-to: cengiz@ISI.EDU X-Organisation: USC / Information Sciences Institute X-Phone: +1 (310) 822 1511 x219 X-Fax: +1 (310) 823 6714 Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, With the publication of this rfc, the WG has completed its charter. As agreed earlier, we are going to ask IESG to close the RPS WG. We will keep the mailing list alive. When it is time to move the documents in the standards process, we are going to ask IESG to reopen the WG. We already have 3 server implementations of RPSL RFC, and a fourth one is coming, and one implementation of this and security RFC with more implementations on the way. In about a year, we should demonstrate sufficient interoperability for all of these standards. We are going to wait about a week before sending an official request to IESG. This is your last chance to raise any issues before we do so. RFC Editor (rfc-ed@ISI.EDU) on February 11: > > A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. > > > RFC 2769 > > Title: Routing Policy System Replication > Author(s): C. Villamizar, C. Alaettinoglu, R. Govindan, > D. Meyer > Status: Standards Track > Date: February 2000 > Mailbox: curtis@avici.com, cengiz@ISI.EDU, > govindan@ISI.EDU, dmm@cisco.com > Pages: 42 > Characters: 95255 > Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None > I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rps-dist-06.txt > > URL: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2769.txt Cengiz -- Cengiz Alaettinoglu Information Sciences Institute http://www.isi.edu/~cengiz University of Southern California From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Fri Feb 11 18:31:55 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26130 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 18:31:52 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id PAA17596 for rps-outgoing; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:11:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id PAA17591 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from rip.psg.com (rip.psg.com [147.28.0.39]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id PAA21617; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:11:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from randy by rip.psg.com with local (Exim 3.13 #1) id 12JPDU-000JNz-00; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:11:12 -0800 From: Randy Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Cc: rps@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: WG Status References: <14500.30063.465308.566109@cat.isi.edu> Message-Id: Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:11:12 -0800 Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > We are going to wait about a week before sending an official request > to IESG. oops! the ad saw the rfc and asked already the secretariat to close the wg. if folk have problems, holler now! well done all! and especial thanks to cengiz and curtis. randy From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Mon Feb 28 20:10:59 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA24930 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 20:10:58 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id QAA28818 for rps-outgoing; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:42:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id NAA19452 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 13:26:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from fulcrum (fulcrum.ie.cw.net [204.70.128.22]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id NAA14328 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 13:27:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from cw.net ([204.71.41.64]) by cw.net (PMDF V5.2-32 #35957) with ESMTPA id <0FQN00FCJSVUU8@cw.net> for rps@isi.edu; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:26:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:26:17 -0500 From: Tan Lien Subject: Problems with RIPE to RPSL conversion.. To: rps@ISI.EDU, tan@cw.net Message-id: <38BAE7F9.A19F8C79@cw.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.6 sun4m) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------C0A9AB5F9A46339FDEF11BE7" X-Accept-Language: en Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list --------------C0A9AB5F9A46339FDEF11BE7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm in the process of converting our RIPE database to RPSL database. I ran into several problems. I have converted all the RIPE objects into RPSL objects in a db file called 'cw.db '. All the maintainer objects and other objects exists in 'cw.db' after the conversion using 'ripe2rpsl' tool. But when I tried submitting a route object with a maintainer that exists in 'cw.db', it rejected the submission with an error saying maintainer doesn't exist. It is clearly in the 'cw.db' file. Now do I have to run something else to index the 'cw.db' so that the IRR daemon recognizes that the maintainer is actually in the database after the ripe2rpsl conversion? OR Do I have to convert the format and submit the RPSL formatted objects one by one until the end of the objects in the file database so that IRR daemon can keep track of the index? Tan -- Internet Engineering, Cable & Wireless USA 11700 Plaza America Drive Reston, VA 22091 Phone: (703) 292-2228 Email:tan@cw.net Beeper: bp-tan@cw.net --------------C0A9AB5F9A46339FDEF11BE7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi,

I'm in the process of converting our RIPE database to RPSL database.  I ran into several problems.

I have converted all the RIPE objects into RPSL objects in a db file called 'cw.db '.  All the maintainer objects and other objects exists in 'cw.db' after the conversion using 'ripe2rpsl' tool. But when I tried submitting a route object with a maintainer that exists in 'cw.db', it rejected the submission with an error saying maintainer doesn't exist.  It is clearly in the 'cw.db' file.
Now do I have to run something else to index the 'cw.db' so that the IRR daemon recognizes that the maintainer is actually in the database after the ripe2rpsl conversion?

OR

Do I have to convert the format and submit the RPSL formatted objects one by one until the end of the objects in the file database so that IRR daemon can keep track of the index?
 

Tan
  

-- 
Internet Engineering, Cable & Wireless USA
11700 Plaza America Drive
Reston, VA 22091 
Phone: (703) 292-2228 Email:tan@cw.net  Beeper: bp-tan@cw.net
  --------------C0A9AB5F9A46339FDEF11BE7-- From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Mon Feb 28 20:11:38 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA24968 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 20:11:37 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id QAA29218 for rps-outgoing; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:52:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id QAA29212 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:52:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from dog.isi.edu ([203.255.145.35]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id QAA09800; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:52:29 -0800 (PST) Received: (from cengiz@localhost) by dog.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA01674; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:52:42 -0800 From: Cengiz Alaettinoglu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14523.6233.889170.331548@localhost.localdomain> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:52:41 -0800 (PST) To: Tan Lien Cc: rps@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: Problems with RIPE to RPSL conversion.. In-Reply-To: <38BAE7F9.A19F8C79@cw.net> References: <38BAE7F9.A19F8C79@cw.net> X-Mailer: VM 6.71 under 21.1 (patch 3) "Acadia" XEmacs Lucid Reply-to: cengiz@ISI.EDU X-Organisation: USC / Information Sciences Institute X-Phone: +1 (310) 822 1511 x219 X-Fax: +1 (310) 823 6714 Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tan, What server software are you using? This question can be better answered if you tell us this. Cengiz -- Cengiz Alaettinoglu Information Sciences Institute http://www.isi.edu/~cengiz University of Southern California From rps-owner@ISI.EDU Tue Feb 29 03:50:50 2000 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA13627 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 03:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id AAA20648 for rps-outgoing; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:30:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id WAA14404 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 22:08:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from fulcrum (fulcrum.ie.cw.net [204.70.128.22]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id WAA00642; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 22:08:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from cw.net ([146.135.86.123]) by cw.net (PMDF V5.2-32 #35957) with ESMTPA id <0FQO00N1JH0Q3F@cw.net>; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 01:07:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 01:07:43 -0500 From: Tan Lien Subject: Re: Problems with RIPE to RPSL conversion.. To: cengiz@ISI.EDU Cc: rps@ISI.EDU Message-id: <38BB622F.B8479BB5@cw.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en References: <38BAE7F9.A19F8C79@cw.net> <14523.6233.889170.331548@localhost.localdomain> Sender: owner-rps@ISI.EDU Precedence: rps-list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm running irrd downloaded from www.irrd.net. Cengiz Alaettinoglu wrote: > Tan, > > What server software are you using? This question can be better > answered if you tell us this. > > Cengiz > > -- > Cengiz Alaettinoglu Information Sciences Institute > http://www.isi.edu/~cengiz University of Southern California