[db-wg] Abuse-C/IRT

  Hi Pim,

>| Hmm, this is nice, but not really necessary, because with the -c flag in 
>| the whois-query you should get tho the allocated /40 anyway.
>| 
>| i.e. your change should increase the # of objects, bur not the Footprint
>|      of the IRT
> [ ... ]
>                                      , should I revert that software
>change and NOT set mnt-irt in the more specifics, or should I leave it
>as is. Opinions ?

  setting it to the _same_ pointer is superfluous or just duplication of
  information.

  Unless you want to do it for a particular purpose (like to be explicit),
  it is a bad idea - having duplicate info in a dataset leaves you with
  the risk of missing one copy when an update is necessary.

  BUT - what you can do with this mechanism is to point to a _different_
  irt object. Either for a subset of your own infrastructure (like a
  regional PoP), or as a 1st level contact for your downstreams.

  And those downstreams can update the contact info without having to
  bother you in your role as the _address_ bookkeeping :-)

  Wilfried.