[db-wg] RIPE DB Route Object fails creation

>> Denis, do you remember *why* that is the rule?
>
> RFC2725, section 9.9.
>
> He says, retiring to a safe distance... :)

Heh.

Well, first off, the rule specified in the RFC to require
authentication via the origin aut-num object has been abolished,
so that doesn't apply.

Secondly, is it just me that find the RFC to be sorely lacking in
justification for *why* the maintainer of an exact matching route
object should be used in preference to the inetnum hierarchy
maintainers?  It just says "this will be used first", not why,
neither in section 9.9 nor in appendix C that I can see.

Also, the fact that such a "blocking" route object can be
"forcefully deleted" (via some "special" operation?) based solely
on the inetnum hierarchy maintainers is an indication that this
whole matter hasn't been properly thought through and made
consistent, and this workaround just sounds like a massive kludge
which complicates matters instead of simplifying them.  Also, it
does not exactly help that the error message you get when trying
to add a new route object "could be improved".

Regards,

- Håvard