Re: Whois using these ARIN services?? (fwd: Consultation on the Future of ARIN???s Directory Services)

[Tom Beecher via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

> Your telephone landline (if you still have one) or VoIP to POTS
> adapter usually supports rotary dialing. It's been nearly half a
> century since anyone made a rotary phone but the POTS equipment still
> supports rotary dialing.
>
> Why?
>
> Because backward compatibility is valuable. There's a disadvantage to
> building a POTS adapter which is less than 100% backward compatible.
> And the cost to implement a user-interface skin atop modern signaling
> which implements rotary dialing is utterly trivial.
>
> So I agree with you: why shouldn't the RIR use an RDAP server that
> also provides a whois-compatible user interface skin? And do so
> indefinitely?



The PSTN hasn't supported pulse 'indefinitely'. In the 60s when DTMF was
deployed, the PSTN supported both as a transition mechanism for 30 years.
In the 90s, LECs started retiring the pulse equipment, moving to DTMF only.
Once a given network did that, users then were required to use a pulse-DTMF
adapter to continue using the system with old equipment. While some systems
still haven't fully retired pulse, most have.

Almost everything in tech moves through these transition cycles. Start with
A , run A + B in parallel, retire A. Demanding that A and B run in parallel
indefinitely just because "I don't want to change my thing that relies on
A" is silly.


On Sun, Aug 30, 2026 at 12:16 AM William Herrin via NANOG <
nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 12:04 AM borg--- via NANOG
> <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
> > Actually, I think RIRs could actually run proxy themselfs, and
> > generate WHOIS reply based on RDAP data. Why not?
>
> Your telephone landline (if you still have one) or VoIP to POTS
> adapter usually supports rotary dialing. It's been nearly half a
> century since anyone made a rotary phone but the POTS equipment still
> supports rotary dialing.
>
> Why?
>
> Because backward compatibility is valuable. There's a disadvantage to
> building a POTS adapter which is less than 100% backward compatible.
> And the cost to implement a user-interface skin atop modern signaling
> which implements rotary dialing is utterly trivial.
>
> So I agree with you: why shouldn't the RIR use an RDAP server that
> also provides a whois-compatible user interface skin? And do so
> indefinitely?
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
>
> --
> For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
>
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/7SIXWDUQ4YVZFIHJ4W73JEUCRVOZ3AWC/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/GQCZWRRYGO7YVKJNU4QJL25KRTSGL5WC/