Home / Blogs

Registry Data Quality Assessment

Accurate registration data is essential for the global registry system. To ensure that the RIPE Registry’s data is correct, up-to-date and accurate, the RIPE NCC regularly checks the Registry data to fix inconsistencies and outdated information. We recently evaluated and analysed all IP address ranges registered in the RIPE Database and were pleased to find that 96.09% of those records are considered accurate.

We categorised the IP address ranges into two categories:

  • Address space distributed by the RIPE NCC (marked blue in the image below)
  • Legacy address space registered in a different registry prior to the formation of the RIR system and inherited by the RIPE NCC (marked red in the image below)

We looked at the confidence score for each /8 from which the RIPE NCC registers addresses (as shown in the image below). Not surprisingly, our assessment revealed that the highest scoring records belonged to IPv4 address space distributed directly by the RIPE NCC. The lowest scoring /8s tend to be legacy space, and in these cases the address holder is not necessarily in regular contact with the RIPE NCC.

Registry Data Quality score per /8 (Click to Enlarge)

While 96.09% of the entries we looked at scored extremely high on the confidence scale, we will continue to work towards closing the gap on the lower-scoring 3.91%. We are doing this on an ongoing basis by cleaning up overlapping entries. We will also continue to monitor the registrations that score well today in order to catch any deterioration of registration quality.

We are also in the process of contacting legacy space holders and urging them to update their registration data, and RIPE Policy 2007-01, “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region”, is now in its third phase of implementation.

If you’re an address space holder, we encourage you to take a moment to make sure that your registrations are updated in the Database in your service region.

For more background information, including a description of the methodology used, please refer to the RIPE Labs article: Registry Data Quality Assessment—Phase 2

Filed Under


Comment Title:

  Notify me of follow-up comments

We encourage you to post comments and engage in discussions that advance this post through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can report it using the link at the end of each comment. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of CircleID. For more information on our comment policy, see Codes of Conduct.

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet



IPv4 Markets

Sponsored byIPv4.Global

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign

Brand Protection

Sponsored byCSC

New TLDs

Sponsored byRadix


Sponsored byVerisign

Threat Intelligence

Sponsored byWhoisXML API