This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] [db-wg] Guidance Requested: Reassigning Referenced ASNs
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [db-wg] Guidance Requested: Reassigning Referenced ASNs
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [db-wg] Guidance Requested: Reassigning Referenced ASNs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andrey Semenchuk
andrey at trifle.net
Wed Jun 26 19:50:29 CEST 2013
Randy Bush wrote: >> If the ASN is already returned to the pool, it means that the RIPE had >> tried to communicate with the resource holder at least three times >> during at least 3 month. >> > > the resource holder of a route: object owns the ip space, not > necessarily the asn. > Actually, he owns nothing. He holds. Nevertheless, how does it correlates with reassigning of ASNs and removing references to it? If the resource holder doesn't hold AS number - he shouldn't use it. If he shouldn't use it - any reference to object that doesn't hold by any End User may be (and should be) deleted for the future reassigning. I saw no information inside proposal to remove the objects that referenced to deleted ASN - it's just removing a broken references inside those objects. So, deleting of the broken references is the way to provide integrity to RIPE's database - nothing additional. -- Best wishes, Andrey Semenchuk Trifle Internet Service Provider (056) 731-99-11 www.trifle.net
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [db-wg] Guidance Requested: Reassigning Referenced ASNs
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [db-wg] Guidance Requested: Reassigning Referenced ASNs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]