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] Draft Minutes of the RIPE 52 DB-WG meeting

• Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Draft Minutes of the RIPE 52 DB-WG meeting
• Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Draft Minutes of the RIPE 52 DB-WG meeting

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Nigel Titley nigel.titley at uk.easynet.net
Mon May 8 16:13:10 CEST 2006

> 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.

And this, if I recall correctly was, at the heart of the argument in
Istanbul

Nigel

• Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Draft Minutes of the RIPE 52 DB-WG meeting
• Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Draft Minutes of the RIPE 52 DB-WG meeting

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ db-wg Archives ]