[db-wg] draft agenda (V1) for DB-WG meeting, RIPE 49, Manchester, UK

On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 07:47:15PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> > > - minor database changes to limit the number of '@' signs returned
> 
> Could break some query functionality in case someone has say 5 e-mail
> lines in one object or one refers to a role object which refers to
> multiple people etc. Don't think this is really viable.

If your query breaks when we stop returning a number of email addresses
form the database, you're part of the target audience. There are better
ways to find a contact then grepping for email addresses in changed
attributes.
 
> One can download the complete thing using ftp anyways.

I can't see that there will be a difference between the objects returned
from the whois interface and those in the database dump on the ftp site.

Removing email addresses (or censor them) will only have effect when
removed in all views.
 
> > Many of these options are not mutually exclusive, i.e. it's probably a
> > good idea, independently from implementing or not abuse-c, to make PGP
> > attributes in IRT records optional and to make the email address in the
> > changed attribute a free form string (it does not /need/ to reference a
> > person object, as long as people in each organization can agree on what
> > should be put there).
> > Is anybody opposed to these changes?
> 
> Nope, changing the e-mail lines to person objects is probably wiser
> indeed. The whois interface could btw hide all the entries between the
> first and the last entry?

Why, it's there with a reason. If it hasn't got a reason we should remove
it from the database and not just from the interface.

Grtx,

MarcoH