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]/
Immediate - Date in Changed field
- Previous message (by thread): Immediate - Date in Changed field
- Next message (by thread): Immediate - Date in Changed field
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Cengiz Alaettinoglu
cengiz at ISI.EDU
Mon Jan 13 19:14:20 CET 1997
Joachim Schmitz (Schmitz at rus.uni-stuttgart.de) on January 13: > > Dear Wilfried, dear Carol, > > regarding time stamps in the RIPE-db you wrote:: > > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 13:58:20 MET > > From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" <woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> > > To: Carol.Orange at ripe.net > > Cc: db-wg at ripe.net, woeber at cc.univie.ac.at > > Message-Id: <009AE4E2.4C214CCA.9 at cc.univie.ac.at> > > Subject: RE: Immediate - Date in Changed field > > > > Hi DB-folks! > > > > On a slightly different aspect, > > and assuming that we change things anyway... > > > > How about running the RIPE-DB (and maybe gradually all the others :-) on > > a UTC basis, according to some recent suggestions? > > I think both the 4 digit year presentation and the UTC basis (I estimate > this includes hh:mm:ss as well) are a very valuable extension for time > stamps in the RIPE-db. This might as well ease some of the troubles in > updates within the "near real time" mirrors. I definitely agree for the need for this. But the changed attribute is inserted by the person who registers the object, not by the database software, he has the full control over which timezone he uses and to lie. May be what we really want is a timestamp field with the granularity you suggest and in UTC zone, but inserted to the objects automatically by the database software. I see a lot of value in this. > > Joachim > > > Just for a sneak preview on one of the small agenda items for the DB WG :-) > > > > Wilfried. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Dear Database WG members, > > > > We have been requested to ease the restrictions on the date > > in the "changed" attribute to allow for dates with 4 digit years > > specifically those starting with "19" and eventually "20". > > > > For obvious reasons, we agree with this proposition. However, we > > also understand that some of you may have software which presumes > > the date has the yymmdd format. > > > > If anyone has a serious problem with this change, please notify me > > personally (orange at ripe.net) before the end of the week. > > > > If we don't hear any show stoppers before the end of the week, we > > will proceed. Thereafter, the following will be acceptable formats: > > > > 19yymmdd > > 20yymmdd (eventually) > > yymmdd > > > > Thanks for your ear, > > > > -- Carol Orange > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Cengiz -- Cengiz Alaettinoglu Information Sciences Institute (310) 822-1511 University of Southern California http://www.isi.edu/~cengiz
- Previous message (by thread): Immediate - Date in Changed field
- Next message (by thread): Immediate - Date in Changed field
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]