From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: location@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: ASNs without AS name information (LACNIC and JPNIC) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 09:09:57 +0000 Message-ID: <666CB5D5-A340-4DEB-AB59-84E9B3D2F252@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2745820710298148438==" List-Id: --===============2745820710298148438== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, > On 16 Jan 2022, at 22:16, nusenu wrote: >=20 >>> Both AS lack an "aut-num" object in JPNIC, which is why there is no parse= able information >>> for them at hand in there. Not sure where RIPEstat gets their description= from... >>>=20 >>> Anyways, ARIN, LACNIC and a better approach to missing data is on my list= for next week. >>> I'll see what we can to then. >> AS names (the holder's name) shown on RIPEstat come from the CIDR report >> https://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/ >> according to RIPE NCC's reply. >> Maybe this is a one for all solution. >=20 > Since you apparently don't like this data source Apparently? > and I always thought RIPEstat has pretty good data quality: > Would you mind sharing your opinion on this? I do not see the good data quality here. Some have proper names, others are c= alled something like "XO-AS15=E2=80=9D, or =E2=80=9CCMCS=E2=80=9D, or =E2=80= =9CAS17054=E2=80=9D. This isn=E2=80=99t great. Arguably, this is better than nothing and I wouldn=E2=80=99t mind using the d= escription wherever we don=E2=80=99t have anything better, but it isn=E2=80= =99t first choice. @Peter: Do you want to look into extracting information from this? -Michael >=20 > kind regards, > nusenu > --=20 > https://nusenu.github.io --===============2745820710298148438==--