{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151/events","html_url":"https://github.com/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151","id":223126955,"number":151,"title":"Validation of IRR Records","user":{"login":"dotwaffle","id":17210,"avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/17210?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle","html_url":"https://github.com/dotwaffle","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dotwaffle/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"id":388636346,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"84b6eb","default":true}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":14,"created_at":"2017-04-20T16:33:29Z","updated_at":"2018-05-08T19:09:00Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"Many of the IRR Record fields in networks records can not be used because they are being used as free-text. It would be good to add validation to this field, perhaps just making sure the record is valid at well-trused sources on RADB or similar.\r\n\r\nLikewise, would it make sense to have that as a once-daily updated prefix list, or is that implementor specific for their automation with bgpq3 etc?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/comments/387509963","html_url":"https://github.com/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151#issuecomment-387509963","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/151","id":387509963,"user":{"login":"devicenull","id":58017,"avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/58017?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull","html_url":"https://github.com/devicenull","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/devicenull/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-05-08T19:09:00Z","updated_at":"2018-05-08T19:09:00Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"We've run into this as well, we're trying to automation generation of prefix lists, but the data in this field is.. interesting.  I see URLs, random strings, and my favorite, the string \"NONE\"\r\n\r\nEven RIPE seemed to mess this up: https://www.peeringdb.com/net/3859"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"devicenull"}}