From ginny at arin.net Mon Dec 2 12:54:20 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:54:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: [dbwg] Re: WHOIS Modification Part 2 of 2 Message-ID: With just a few more days to express your opinion, I thought I'd sum up what has been said so far. Method 1: 1 in favor Method 2: 1 in favor If no additional comments are received by Friday December 6, we will proceed to implement method 1. Notification will be via email to this list and URL listed in the WHOIS banner. Ginny On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > A discussion took place during the Database Implementation Working Group > Meeting at ARIN X in Eugene, Oregon, that networks associated with > organizations, as well as all autonomous system queries provide a postal > address for the holding organization. Although under the new system the > postal address is not an attribute of the resource, this format would > provide the same information as the old WHOIS. The change in display > format could be handled by one of the two following methods: > 1. Provide the postal address for ALL networks/autonomous systems. This > could lengthen the output by 2 or 4 lines in most cases. > 2. Introduce a new flag to be included in the query string that would > produce the postal address for these types of queries. The default > display would not include postal address. > > Prior to implementing these changes, ARIN is soliciting further comments. > Which methods are preferred? Will it be necessary to provide advanced > notice before making the change? > > If no additional comments are received before December 6, ARIN will begin > to implement suggestion 1. It should be noted that time of release of this > change depends upon the method selected. > > Ginny Listman > Director of Engineering > ARIN > > From ginny at arin.net Mon Dec 2 12:52:53 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:52:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 Message-ID: With just a few more days to express your opinion, I thought I'd sum up what has been said so far. #1 - 0 in favor (displayed below) #2 - 1 in favor (displayed below) #3 - 1 in favor (displayed below) #4 - 3 in favor (displayed here and below) OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities OrgID: MCU-1 Address: Government of Ontario Address: Corporate Planning and Services Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities Address: 8th floor, mowat block Address: 900 Bay Street Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 Country: CA Alternative format #5 - 3 in favor (displayed here) OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities OrgID: MCU-1 Address: Government of Ontario Address: Corporate Planning and Services Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities Address: 8th floor, mowat block Address: 900 Bay Street City: Toronto St/Prov: Ont Postal: M7A 1L2 Country: CA If no additional comments are received by Friday December 6, we will proceed to implement format #4. Notification will be via email to this list and URL listed in the WHOIS banner. Also, unless otherwise indicated, the recommendation that all "Comment:" lines include the label will be implemented. Ginny On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > A discussion took place on this mailing list, with further discussion > during the Database Implementation Working Group Meeting at ARIN X in > Eugene, Oregon, regarding separating the city, state/province and postal > code from the address line. This would facilitate parsing the postal > address. This can be done one of three ways: > > Current format: > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Corporate Planning and Services > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > 8th floor, mowat block > 900 Bay Street Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Suggestion format #1: > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Corporate Planning and Services > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > 8th floor, mowat block > 900 Bay Street > Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Suggested format #2: > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Corporate Planning and Services > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > 8th floor, mowat block > 900 Bay Street > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Suggested format #3: > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Corporate Planning and Services > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > 8th floor, mowat block > 900 Bay Street > City/Region: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Suggested format #4: > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > Address: 900 Bay Street > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Although format #1 was not suggested at the meeting, it is similar to the > format for multi-lined comments. Format #2 was the preferred method at the > meeting, mainly because people were focusing on a single line street > address. Format #3 was suggested at the meeting, but consensus was against > it. Format #4 was not suggested at the meeting, but if implemented, begs > the question, "Should the 'Comments:' label be repeated?" > > Prior to implementing this change, ARIN is soliciting further comments. > Which method is preferred? Will it be necessary to provide advanced notice > before making the change? > > If no additional comments are received before December 6, ARIN will begin > to implement format #1. It should be noted that time of release of these > changes depends upon the method selected. > > Ginny Listman > Director of Engineering > ARIN > From william at elan.net Mon Dec 2 13:34:06 2002 From: william at elan.net (william at elan.net) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:34:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: If implementing #4, please make sure you have "," between City, State/Province & Postal Code. At the same time, when city is entered in the templates, put additional checks to make sure "," is not part of city name.v On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > With just a few more days to express your opinion, I thought I'd sum up > what has been said so far. > > #1 - 0 in favor (displayed below) > #2 - 1 in favor (displayed below) > #3 - 1 in favor (displayed below) > #4 - 3 in favor (displayed here and below) > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > Address: 900 Bay Street > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Alternative format #5 - 3 in favor (displayed here) > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > Address: 900 Bay Street > City: Toronto > St/Prov: Ont > Postal: M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > If no additional comments are received by Friday December 6, we will > proceed to implement format #4. Notification will be via email to this > list and URL listed in the WHOIS banner. Also, unless otherwise indicated, > the recommendation that all "Comment:" lines include the label will be > implemented. > > Ginny > > On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > > > > A discussion took place on this mailing list, with further discussion > > during the Database Implementation Working Group Meeting at ARIN X in > > Eugene, Oregon, regarding separating the city, state/province and postal > > code from the address line. This would facilitate parsing the postal > > address. This can be done one of three ways: > > > > Current format: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggestion format #1: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street > > Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggested format #2: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street > > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggested format #3: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street > > City/Region: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggested format #4: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > > Address: 900 Bay Street > > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Although format #1 was not suggested at the meeting, it is similar to the > > format for multi-lined comments. Format #2 was the preferred method at the > > meeting, mainly because people were focusing on a single line street > > address. Format #3 was suggested at the meeting, but consensus was against > > it. Format #4 was not suggested at the meeting, but if implemented, begs > > the question, "Should the 'Comments:' label be repeated?" > > > > Prior to implementing this change, ARIN is soliciting further comments. > > Which method is preferred? Will it be necessary to provide advanced notice > > before making the change? > > > > If no additional comments are received before December 6, ARIN will begin > > to implement format #1. It should be noted that time of release of these > > changes depends upon the method selected. > > > > Ginny Listman > > Director of Engineering > > ARIN > > > > > > From Larry at Riedel.org Mon Dec 2 16:08:00 2002 From: Larry at Riedel.org (Larry Riedel) Date: 2 Dec 2002 21:08:00 -0000 Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20021202210800.6092.qmail@home19.riedel.org> > #4 - 3 in favor > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > #5 - 3 in favor > City: Toronto > St/Prov: Ont > Postal: M7A 1L2 > > [...] > If no additional comments are received by Friday December 6, > we will proceed to implement format #4. I am interested in whether #4 would be found to be preferable to #5 if the choice was narrowed to those two, with the above difference highlighted. I would be hoping for #5, maybe with slightly different field name labels if desired. Larry From ginny at arin.net Mon Dec 2 16:14:07 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:14:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 In-Reply-To: <20021202210800.6092.qmail@home19.riedel.org> Message-ID: gl> #4 - 3 in favor gl> Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 gl> gl> #5 - 3 in favor gl> City: Toronto gl> St/Prov: Ont gl> Postal: M7A 1L2 gl> gl> [...] gl> If no additional comments are received by Friday December 6, gl> we will proceed to implement format #4. lr> I am interested in whether #4 would be found to be preferable lr> to #5 if the choice was narrowed to those two, with the above lr> difference highlighted. I would be hoping for #5, maybe with lr> slightly different field name labels if desired. Do you have any suggestions regarding the field name labels? From Larry at Riedel.org Mon Dec 2 17:02:35 2002 From: Larry at Riedel.org (Larry Riedel) Date: 2 Dec 2002 22:02:35 -0000 Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20021202220235.6315.qmail@home19.riedel.org> > > > #5 - 3 in favor > > > City: Toronto > > > St/Prov: Ont > > > Postal: M7A 1L2 > > > > I would be hoping for #5, maybe with slightly different > > field name labels if desired. > > Do you have any suggestions regarding the field name labels? My only primary concern is having a "/" in a field name, so I would minimally prefer "StProv", although I would rather have "StateProv", "StateProvince", or maybe "StateOrProvince", depending on what is the current maximum field label length. I think "Postal" is fine, and I think "PCode" or "PostalCode" would be fine too. Larry From william at elan.net Mon Dec 2 17:15:29 2002 From: william at elan.net (william at elan.net) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:15:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: FYI: Format used by APNIC: address: street & other address: street & other ... address: province, city postal, country country: 2-letter-code OR address: street & other address: street & other ... address: city, province, postal country: 2-letter-code OR sometimes descr: other & address descr: other & address ... Format used by RIPE: address: other & address address: other & address ... address: postal city (here either postal or city or both maybe missing) address: state country (here either state or country or both maybe missing) OR address: other & address address: other & address ... address: postal city - country OR sometimes descr: other & street address descr: other & street address ... descr: postal city Format used by LACNIC: address: other & address address: other & address ... address: postal - city - province country: 2-letter-code Neither RIPE nor APNIC have very consistent entry for address, seems to me they keep it as one large field in their database all together. I'd like this not happen to ARIN, so it should always be clear when some data is missing (i.e. state, zip or city). On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > With just a few more days to express your opinion, I thought I'd sum up > what has been said so far. > > #1 - 0 in favor (displayed below) > #2 - 1 in favor (displayed below) > #3 - 1 in favor (displayed below) > #4 - 3 in favor (displayed here and below) > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > Address: 900 Bay Street > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > Alternative format #5 - 3 in favor (displayed here) > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > OrgID: MCU-1 > Address: Government of Ontario > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > Address: 900 Bay Street > City: Toronto > St/Prov: Ont > Postal: M7A 1L2 > Country: CA > > If no additional comments are received by Friday December 6, we will > proceed to implement format #4. Notification will be via email to this > list and URL listed in the WHOIS banner. Also, unless otherwise indicated, > the recommendation that all "Comment:" lines include the label will be > implemented. > > Ginny > > On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, ginny listman wrote: > > > > > A discussion took place on this mailing list, with further discussion > > during the Database Implementation Working Group Meeting at ARIN X in > > Eugene, Oregon, regarding separating the city, state/province and postal > > code from the address line. This would facilitate parsing the postal > > address. This can be done one of three ways: > > > > Current format: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggestion format #1: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street > > Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggested format #2: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street > > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggested format #3: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Corporate Planning and Services > > Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > 8th floor, mowat block > > 900 Bay Street > > City/Region: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Suggested format #4: > > > > OrgName: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > OrgID: MCU-1 > > Address: Government of Ontario > > Address: Corporate Planning and Services > > Address: Ministry of Colleges and Universities > > Address: 8th floor, mowat block > > Address: 900 Bay Street > > Address: Toronto Ont M7A 1L2 > > Country: CA > > > > Although format #1 was not suggested at the meeting, it is similar to the > > format for multi-lined comments. Format #2 was the preferred method at the > > meeting, mainly because people were focusing on a single line street > > address. Format #3 was suggested at the meeting, but consensus was against > > it. Format #4 was not suggested at the meeting, but if implemented, begs > > the question, "Should the 'Comments:' label be repeated?" > > > > Prior to implementing this change, ARIN is soliciting further comments. > > Which method is preferred? Will it be necessary to provide advanced notice > > before making the change? > > > > If no additional comments are received before December 6, ARIN will begin > > to implement format #1. It should be noted that time of release of these > > changes depends upon the method selected. > > > > Ginny Listman > > Director of Engineering > > ARIN > > > > > > From jeff-kell at utc.edu Mon Dec 2 18:02:16 2002 From: jeff-kell at utc.edu (Jeff Kell) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:02:16 -0500 Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 References: Message-ID: <3DEBE678.89FB35C1@utc.edu> william at elan.net wrote: > > If implementing #4, please make sure you have "," between City, > State/Province & Postal Code. At the same time, when city is entered > in the templates, put additional checks to make sure "," is not part > of city name.v The options are starting to run together, so let me freelance: (1) city, state/prov, postal code, country (comma-delimited) or (2) city state/prov postal code country as independent tags. In agreement with William's comments, either force a comma (1), or insure no commas (2). Jeff From gah at research.att.com Mon Dec 2 22:08:56 2002 From: gah at research.att.com (Glenn A. Hochberg) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 22:08:56 -0500 Subject: [dbwg] WHOIS Modification - Part 1 of 2 References: Message-ID: <3DEC2048.7FD07FEF@research.att.com> william at elan.net wrote: > Neither RIPE nor APNIC have very consistent entry for address, seems to me > they keep it as one large field in their database all together. I'd like > this not happen to ARIN, so it should always be clear when some data is > missing (i.e. state, zip or city). I agree. For clarity and ease of parsing both, I'd prefer the separate tags. Removing the slash from the St/Prov tag would probably also be wise in the interest of "bug prevention". From ginny at arin.net Mon Dec 9 16:07:17 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:07:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: [dbwg] Status of Early Registration Transfer (ERX) Message-ID: Through coordinated efforts with APNIC, LACNIC and RIPE NCC, earlier this year, ARIN began the process of transferring resources inherited from the InterNIC. These resouces had been delegated to organizations that reside outside of the ARIN region. Progress continues. Please refer to the following website for the latest information: http://www.arin.net/registration/erx/ Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN From ginny at arin.net Mon Dec 30 11:42:21 2002 From: ginny at arin.net (ginny listman) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:42:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: [dbwg] Appending Action to Subject Line Message-ID: Effective January 6, 2003, ARIN will append the word "REJECTED" or "APPROVED" to the subject line on the return message for all Reassign, Reallocate, AS Number Modification and Network Modification Templates. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:55:28 -0500 (EST) From: ginny listman To: dbwg at arin.net Subject: [dbwg] Appending Action to Subject Line A discussion took place on this mailing list, with further discussion during the Database Implementation Working Group Meeting at ARIN X in Eugene, Oregon, regarding a method to more clearly identify rejected templates. It was suggested ARIN append the word "REJECTED" or "APPROVED" to the subject line on the return message for all Reassign, Reallocate, AS Number Modification, and Network Modification templates. Prior to implementing this procedural change, ARIN is soliciting further comments. Will it be necessary to provide advanced notice before making this procedural change? If so, is one week sufficient? If no additional comments are received before November 29, ARIN will begin to implement this procedural change, with an expected release date in January. Ginny Listman Director of Engineering ARIN