[db-wg] Draft Minutes of the RIPE 52 DB-WG meeting

Hi Denis,

Denis Walker wrote:

> Hi
> 
[...]
> Another point that confused me from the minutes. Returning irt objects
> with -m? Was this a typo or did you really mean return irt objects for
> more specific ranges? Is there a use case for this?

This was me :-)

As the lookup for irt: has the nice capability to do a search towards the
less specific blocks (by design!) it is easy to implement both an optional
"local" irt: contact which is handled directly by (some of) our customers
plus a catch-all on our allocated block.

Just as I use the -m or -M flag to look at the more specifics in generla,
it occurred to me that it might be equally useful to find out which more
specific blocks assigned to our customers have been linked to a local irt:
object.

If this is hard to implement, or nobody else can see a use case for it, then
we can forget about it :-) there are other ways to find this out, albeit less
fancy :-)

> regards
> Denis Walker
> Software Engineering Department
> RIPE NCC

Wilfried.