[rpd] AfriNIC and Geo-Location

[Owen DeLong]

I don’t think AfriNIC will have any answers for you.

I think you need to go to the GeoLocation database providers and ask them about their peculiar behavior.

GeoLocation is a black art. It is actually, IMHO, unfortunate that it works as well as it does because it works just well enough that people use it and then when it breaks things horribly for a few customers, those customers are basically SOL.

Apparently I’m one of the more unfortunate because I’ve been hit with geolocation based problems several times (different client networks and different services) and have had very little luck in ever getting anything resolved (in part because my problems usually occur when I am in a transient location).

Personally, I wish we could just teach the world that topology != geography and get rid of the stupid belief that geolocation by IP is a valid concept.

Owen

> On Jul 3, 2015, at 04:43 , McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Morning Andrew,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Andrew Alston
> <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com <mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
>> Hi Guys,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I’ve queried some of this with AfriNIC and am awaiting replies, but in the
>> mean time I figured I’d ask some questions here and perhaps someone with
>> more knowledge of how these things work than I can shed some light.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So, scenario.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I have a /16 block, and lets say hypothetically that the block is held by a
>> Mauritian entity.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I then do an assignment of a /19 out of that /16  block to a sub-company in
>> Kenya.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The geo-location databases will still insist that block is in Mauritius
>> (even after weeks)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> However, if I do a sub-allocate to a sub-company in Kenya, the geo-location
>> databases DO show the space in Kenya.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Now, I understand basically what the difference between assignments and
>> sub-allocations is, but I’m at a loss to understand why the geo-location
>> databases don’t see updates on assignments, no matter how much I dig into
>> the issue.
> 
> So it seems that geo loc entities only use the allocation (and sub
> allocation) country field, not those used in assignments?
> 
> If so, then it is those entities that need to change, not Afrinic.
> 
> the inetnum template allows for multiple countries to be used in the
> "country" field:
> 
> inetnum: [mandatory] [single] [primary/lookup key]
> netname: [mandatory] [single] [lookup key]
> descr: [mandatory] [multiple] [ ]
> country: [mandatory] [multiple] [ ]
> admin-c: [mandatory] [multiple] [inverse key]
> tech-c: [mandatory] [multiple] [inverse key]
> 
> org: [optional] [multiple] [inverse key]
> status: [mandatory] [single] [ ]
> remarks: [optional] [multiple] [ ]
> notify: [optional] [multiple] [inverse key]
> mnt-by: [mandatory] [multiple] [inverse key]
> mnt-lower: [optional] [multiple] [inverse key]
> mnt-routes: [optional] [multiple] [inverse key]
> mnt-irt: [optional] [multiple] [inverse key]
> changed: [mandatory] [multiple] [ ]
> source: [mandatory] [single] [ ]
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  If I understood this, I could then go to AfriNIC and see if we
>> could find a way to fix this, because it DOES create a problem for
>> multi-nationals that are assigning space to companies that are buying cross
>> border circuits and aren’t geo-located in the original country of
>> assignment.  (Which creates inaccurate whois data).
> 
> 
> it won't be inaccurate if the allocation holder uses the country field
> when adding inetnum objects to the afrinic DB, right?
> 
> 
> or am I missing smt here?
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> In our case, I wouldn’t mind doing the sub-allocate, but I also am
>> struggling to understand the policy motivation behind the sub-allocation
>> stuff (I’ve queried this with AfriNIC staff a few minutes ago, and I’m sure
>> when they get time they will explain), but basically if you sub-allocate,
>> that puts a request through to the staff and seems to ask for all sorts of
>> justifications for it (addressing plans etc), and I’m trying to understand
>> if there is anything in the policies that would require this beyond what is
>> done for assignments.  If anyone knows of anything off the top of their
>> heads, info would be appreciated.
> 
> from : http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/126-afpub-2005-v4-001 <http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/126-afpub-2005-v4-001>
> 
> 
> "6.5 Sub-Allocation
> 
> To "sub-allocate" means to distribute address space (by LIRs) to ISPs
> for the purpose of subsequent distribution."
> 
> 
> In other words, you can further ASSIGN from a sub-allocation, but not
> from an assignment, so that is the difference.
> 
> --
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20150703/78d5c714/attachment.html>