[Bug 2422114] New: Review Request: perl-Net-DNSBL-Client - Perl module with client code for querying multiple DNSBLs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Bug ID: 2422114 Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-DNSBL-Client - Perl module with client code for querying multiple DNSBLs Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.spec SRPM URL: https://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.src.rpm Description: This Perl module is an easy-to-use library for looking up IP addresses against multiple DNSBLs at once. It supports different types of DNSBLs: Normal, meaning that any returned A record indicates a hit, match, meaning that one of the returned A records must exactly match a given IP address, mask, meaning that one of the returned A records must evaluate to non-zero when bitwise-ANDed against a given IP address, or txt meaning that TXT records should be looked up and returned (rather than A records). Fedora Account System Username: robert
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- There seems to be some problem with the following file. SRPM URL: https://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.src.rpm Fetching it results in a 404 Not Found error. Please make sure the URL is correct and publicly available.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #2 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de --- [fedora-review-service-build]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://metacpan.org/dist/% | |{pkgname} Keywords| |AutomationTriaged
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9908909 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Andreas Haupt andreas.haupt@desy.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |andreas.haupt@desy.de Flags| |fedora-review? Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |andreas.haupt@desy.de Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Andreas Haupt andreas.haupt@desy.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Haupt andreas.haupt@desy.de --- I reviewed the package:
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "The Perl 5 License". 23 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/andreas/FedoraReview/2422114-perl-Net-DNSBL- Client/licensecheck.txt [ ]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Net(perl-Net-Daemon, perl-Net-IMAP- Client, perl-Net-IMAP-Simple, perl-Net-DAVTalk, perl-Net-LDAP-SID, perl-Net-Pcap-Easy, perl-Net-CalDAVTalk, perl-Net-Statsd, perl-Net- Whois-Raw, perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect, perl-Net-OpenID-Server, perl- Net-CardDAVTalk, perl-Net-Amazon-EC2-Metadata, perl-Net-DHCP, perl- Net-GPSD, perl-Net-OpenSSH, perl-Net-Random, perl-Net-BGP, perl-Net- IP-Minimal, perl-Net-Amazon-S3, perl-Net-Async-SOCKS, perl-Net-OpenID- Common, perl-Net-eBay, perl-Net-FTPSSL, perl-Net-IP-Match-Regexp, perl-Net-Server, perl-Net-IP, perl-Net-SMTP-SSL, perl-Net-Works, perl- Net-Server-SS-PreFork, perl-Net-OAuth, perl-Net-Facebook-Oauth2, perl- Net-SNMP, perl-Net-IMAP-Simple-SSL, perl-Net-OpenID-Consumer, perl- Net-POP3S, perl-Net-SSLGlue, perl-Net-UPnP, perl-Net-DNS-Resolver- Programmable, perl-Net-SSH, perl-Net-Netmask, perl-Net-SFTP, perl-Net- NBName, perl-libnet, perl-Net-SFTP-Foreign, perl-Net-XMPP, perl-Net- Domain-TLD, perl-Net-Statsd-Server, perl-Net-DNS-Resolver-Mock, perl- LDAP, perl-Net-Async-HTTP-Server, perl-Net-Stomp, perl-Test-TCP, perl- Net-IPv6Addr, perl-Net-Async-WebSocket, perl-Net-SNPP, perl-Net- Telnet, perl-Net-LDAP-Server-Test, perl-Net-Server-Coro, perl-Net- FTPServer, perl-Net-Ping-External, perl-Net-IDN-Nameprep, perl-Net- Ping, perl-Net-SCP, perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle, perl-Net-AMQP, perl-Net- ASN, perl-Net-CIDR-Lite, perl-Net-Appliance-Session, perl-Net-LDAP- Server, perl-Net-Amazon, fpdns, perl-Net-DNS, perl-Net-IPv4Addr, perl- Net-IRC, perl-Net-HTTP, perl-Net-Amazon-EC2, perl-Net-INET6Glue, perl- Net-SMTPS, perl-Net-IDN-PP, perl-Net-MQTT-Simple, perl-Net-CIDR) [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict. [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 897 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Perl: [ ]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Requires. [ ]: CPAN urls should be non-versioned.
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [ ]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [ ]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc45.noarch.rpm perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc45.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpjvf_sf7l')] checks: 32, packages: 2
perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.noarch: E: spelling-error ('bitwise', '%description -l en_US bitwise -> bit wise, bit-wise, leastwise') perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.noarch: E: spelling-error ('txt', '%description -l en_US txt -> text, ext, tit') perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.src: E: spelling-error ('bitwise', '%description -l en_US bitwise -> bit wise, bit-wise, leastwise') perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.src: E: spelling-error ('txt', '%description -l en_US txt -> text, ext, tit') 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings, 7 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.4 s
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.9.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 1
perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.noarch: E: spelling-error ('bitwise', '%description -l en_US bitwise -> bit wise, bit-wise, leastwise') perl-Net-DNSBL-Client.noarch: E: spelling-error ('txt', '%description -l en_US txt -> text, ext, tit') 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings, 3 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.0 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://cpan.metacpan.org/authors/id/D/DS/DSKOLL/Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207.tar.... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 935ead2bad15fe23b307839b711deb808b9e5eb5d94c0a669a97dced74434ea2 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 935ead2bad15fe23b307839b711deb808b9e5eb5d94c0a669a97dced74434ea2
Requires -------- perl-Net-DNSBL-Client (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/perl perl(:VERSION) perl(Carp) perl(IO::Select) perl(Net::DNS::Resolver) perl(Net::DNSBL::Client) perl(strict) perl(warnings) perl-libs
Provides -------- perl-Net-DNSBL-Client: perl(Net::DNSBL::Client) perl-Net-DNSBL-Client
Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2422114 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Perl, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: fonts, R, Java, PHP, Python, C/C++, SugarActivity, Haskell, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
=== Approval ===
Spelling errors: - "bitwise" found in "bitwise-ANDed" just like in the original description. bitwise seems to be just a correct word meanwhile, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitwise_operation - txt is used as valid dns txt record
Package is approved
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #5 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de --- Andreas, thank you very much for the review! Is there any particular review that you need?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RELEASE_PENDING
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-DNSBL-Client Monitoring: Wasn't able to create project in Anitya. You can create it manually on: `https://release-monitoring.org%60
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |MODIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el8) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |MODIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el8) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-419574d590 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-419574d590
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el9) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-36a034ae12 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-36a034ae12
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el9) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-36a034ae12 has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-36a034ae12 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-36a034ae12
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-623e37e9d0 has been pushed to the Fedora 44 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-623e37e9d0 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-623e37e9d0
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-18e26ae0e6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.3 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-18e26ae0e6
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-47ba390308 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.2 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-47ba390308
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-cd61957398 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.1 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-cd61957398
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-419574d590 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-419574d590 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-419574d590
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2026-05-27 00:52:35
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-623e37e9d0 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-b3ad705836 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el8) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-36a034ae12 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-2c92c4551b (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el9) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-18e26ae0e6 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el10_3) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.3 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2026-419574d590 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422114
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2026-47ba390308 (perl-Net-DNSBL-Client-0.207-1.el10_2) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.2 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com