[PDB Tech] PeeringDB API Discrepency

[Chris Van Fossen]

*> There are 84 dupe v4 and 51 dupe v6, so we'll fix the data and add the
constraint.*

That constraint can be a problem.

Example:
Network ABC is given an IP by an IX and updates PeeringDB. Later on,
Network ABC leaves the IX, or goes out of business, or stops caring about
peering. Their PeeringDB entry stays up. The IX decides to give the IP to
new network XYZ. Now the new network cannot put it into PeeringDB, as the
old entry is still sitting with Network ABC.

Happened to me in the past. Got around it by adding a space at the end of
the IP (had to remember to strip out the space when processing data from
PeeringDB).

If we add the constraint, does the resolution become reaching out to
PeeringDB support and waiting for admin to sort it?

Best,
Chris

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Matt Griswold <grizz at 20c.com> wrote:

> From looking through the code, this was never implemented in v2, we can't
> think of any technical reasons so it was likely just my screw up while
> migrating the database. There are 84 dupe v4 and 51 dupe v6, so we'll fix
> the data and add the constraint.
>
> The deploy automation needs updating from switching hosts before, but
> we'll get this out ASAP.
>
> On Oct 4, 2016 3:28 PM, "Arnold Nipper" <arnold.nipper at de-cix.net> wrote:
>
>> On 04.10.2016 18:53, James Bensley wrote:
>> > On 13 September 2016 at 11:00, Stefan Pratter <stefan at 20c.com> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Thank you for bringing this to our attention, i have opened a github
>> ticket
>> >> for it here:
>> >>
>> >> https://github.com/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/68
>> >>
>> >> Stefan
>> >
>> >
>> > Whilst playing the the PDB API some more I have found another "issue".
>> > It's not an issue with the API as such but perhaps a feature request;
>> > there seems to be no duplication detection.
>> >
>> > I was trying to automate some stuff at this IX:
>> https://www.peeringdb.com/ix/745
>> >
>> > If you look there are two peers listed at that exchange with the same
>> > IPv4 address (AS 8468 and AS 60688, both with IP 195.66.246.11). This
>> > kind of thing should be easily detectable. Any scope for this sort of
>> > function to be added, where the AS number and company are different
>> > there shouldn't be a matching IP, the IP can only be announced by one
>> > AS number at an exchange.
>> >
>>
>> Woow ... how could this happen? Afaik it is not possible to add an IP
>> twice or even more often.
>>
>> Thanks for spotting. We will follow up with LINX to sort out the issue.
>>
>>
>> Arnold
>> --
>> Arnold Nipper
>> Chief Technology Evangelist and Co-Founder
>>
>> DE-CIX Management GmbH | Lindleystrasse 12 | 60314 Frankfurt am Main |
>> Germany | www.de-cix.net | Phone +49 69 1730902 22 |
>> Mobile +49 172 2650958 | Fax +49 69 4056 2716 |
>> arnold.nipper at de-cix.net | Geschaeftsfuehrer Harald A. Summa |
>> Registergericht AG Koeln HRB 51135
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pdb-tech mailing list
>> Pdb-tech at lists.peeringdb.com
>> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pdb-tech mailing list
> Pdb-tech at lists.peeringdb.com
> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.peeringdb.com/pipermail/pdb-tech/attachments/20161004/37f49858/attachment.html>