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

On May 03, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 06:58:06PM +0200, Denis Walker wrote:
> > If some people are concerned about having another object returned in a
> > default query, there is a way round this. We could reverse the -c flag
> > in the query. So the logic behind the -c flag returns an irt object. If
> > -c is not used in an inet(6)num query, the server adds it. Then any irt
> > object is returned by default in these queries. If -c is used in a
> > query, on its own, the server takes it out. So by using -c you do not
> > get the irt object. The benefit of this is that clueless users will get
> > irt objects as a default.
> This sounds very useful to me (and I think it reflects what was agreed
> upon, in Manchester, IIRC).

No, after Manchester the agreement was to return the irt record relevant
to the queried ip/network.
This is subtly different from the behaviour of -c, which may return a
less specific inetnum object if the irt record is referenced by it.

-- 
ciao,
Marco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20060503/cc14c243/attachment.sig>