[db-wg] Decision on NWI-4 INETNUM status values

Hi Nick

Many people have asked for a solution to this problem over recent years.
The chairs have tried to get some discussion on the topic many times.
Perhaps now we can have that discussion...

Cheers
denis
Co-chair DB-WG


On Mon, 4 Apr 2022, 14:55 Nick Hilliard, <nick at foobar.org> wrote:

> denis walker via db-wg wrote on 04/04/2022 13:38:
> > If there are no objections to this, the co-chairs now ask the RIPE NCC
> > to produce an impact/implementation report to add this new status
> > value and include the business rules to restrict it's use.
>
> Denis,
>
> This came up in an email of yours from February:
>
> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg//2022-February/007295.html
>
> > The chairs make no recommendation on this item. But if there is no
> > discussion we will simply mark NWI-4 as cancelled.
>
> and here:
>
> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg//2022-February/007314.html
>
> > Is this a problem that you think needs to be solved? If 'yes' then we
> > need to hear your thoughts. If 'no' then the chairs will cancel NWI-4
> > and move on...
>
> Was there any discussion about why this changed from: "not going to
> implement" to "going to implement"?
>
> Separately, has there been any discussion about this new status value,
> "ALLOCATED-ASSIGNED PA"?  This is a significant change to the semantics
> of this key, and it's one which will cause breakage in the wild.
>
> Nick
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20220404/3ab368fc/attachment.html>