[db-wg] revisiting rpsl-related set of rcf documents?

Wilfried,

At 2015-11-19 14:40:53 +0200
Wilfried Woeber <woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> wrote:

> Following up on the discussion here, during the DB-WG session in Bucharest,
> where changes to different aspects of using the RIPE registry database
> 
> - including a reference to discussions relating to cross-RIR authorisation -
> 
> I'd like to ask the following question to the community:
> 
> Is it about time to revisit the set of RFCs and either get them updated to
> properly reflect the (more) current reality,
> 
> or
> 
> consciously have them declared historic and overtaken by events?
> 
> What's your point of view?

hm... hard to say. Certainly RFC 2622 is a stunningly bad RFC, and RFC
2725 is better but hardly great (I had questions while implementing
RFC 2622 in the past and was told "look at the RtConfig code to see
how it works" when I found inconsistencies). RFC 2769 is an interesting
read, if you like science fiction. ;)

It would be effort to produce a modern set of RPSL RFC's. It could be
done without a *huge* effort if it is possible to replace a
standards-track RFC without setting up an IETF working group. If
booting a working group is required then I would recommend not to do
it (people who understand IETF process better than me may have
other takes on this). :)

Alternately RIPE could produce a set of RIPE documents with "modern"
RPSL described. (RIPE-681? :P) 

I guess your real question is "is it worth the effort?". It doesn't
seem like RPSL will disappear any time soon, so in principle it seems
like updating the documentation is worth it. If this is true, I guess
the question is coming up with the time/money for someone to do this.
(I'm happy to act as a reviewer, but can't author anything like this.)

Cheers,

--
Shane