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/db-wg@ripe.net/
[db-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Shane Kerr
shane at ripe.net
Thu Sep 4 09:51:13 CEST 2003
On 2003-09-04 09:22:56 +0200, Ulrich Kiermayr wrote: > Hi, > > One thing (too early to think about all at once) > > >If we agree on this more generic solution, we could extend this > >behavior to other Objects that can be referenced as well. > >e.g. for mntner: itself. this would be a way tho prevent anyone > >from putting my mntner ont oan object. (This would solve the issue > >discussed in the context of the IRT Object - where the mntner of > >the object should be a proof of authenticity as well) > > This idea is good by means of consistency, BUT it would be weaker > than the auth: in the IRT, because there are only PGP keys allowed, > whereas in a mntner anything is possible. Actually, you can use any "auth:" type in the IRT (even NONE!!!). But don't do that. :-/ -- Shane Kerr RIPE NCC
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]