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] proposal: disallow creation of new non-hierarchically named AS-SET objects

• Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] proposal: disallow creation of new non-hierarchically named AS-SET objects
• Next message (by thread): [db-wg] proposal: disallow creation of new non-hierarchically named AS-SET objects

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

Nick Hilliard nick at foobar.org
Sun Nov 20 18:52:12 CET 2022

Job Snijders via db-wg wrote on 20/11/2022 13:07:
> I'd argue that the rules for what constitute valid hierarchical names
> should not be changed; so the second component of the name doesn't need
> to start with 'AS-'.

you mean "does need to start with 'AS-'"?  I don't see how rfc2622 
allows naked terms, or how that would allow rpsl consumers to determine 
what type of set a specific named item was.

Nick

• Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] proposal: disallow creation of new non-hierarchically named AS-SET objects
• Next message (by thread): [db-wg] proposal: disallow creation of new non-hierarchically named AS-SET objects

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

[ db-wg Archives ]