[routing-wg] WG chairs and year-old minutes...

There are the beginnings of discussions around that Ian. I think thats a
fine thing to discuss too.

-G

On 21 January 2015 at 07:50, Dickinson, Ian <Ian.Dickinson at bskyb.com> wrote:

> If we're looking at this sort of thing, perhaps we can also look at
> getting the IRR objects defined in RDAP too?
>
> Ian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: routing-wg [mailto:routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Job
> Snijders
> Sent: 20 January 2015 17:47
> To: George Michaelson
> Cc: routing-wg at ripe.net; Rob Evans
> Subject: Re: [routing-wg] WG chairs and year-old minutes...
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:35:40PM -0200, George Michaelson wrote:
> > Yes, thats exactly the kind of thing I am talking about, and I welcome
> > your initiative, and I think its good its exposed here so routing-wg
> > people can reflect on it. Clearly, its not only a DB-WG question!
>
> Sorry, that was not clear to me. :-)
>
> > The other part of the story is a concern I have heard stated in DB-WG
> > that 'referential integrity' is very hard to maintain in a database
> > when it refers to external objects, which may cease to exist
> > asynchronously because the constraint cannot be maintained between
> > disparate independent sources.
> > I think that problem is a general problem, and cannot be fixed. I
> > worry, that this may be a 'blocker' for some people.
>
> I don't know what you mean with the above paragraph. Can you maybe
> provide an example to illustrate the issue?
>
> > But, I think the "win" in permitting APNIC::named-object references
> > inside RIPE and vice-versa is very big.
>
> Currently I prefer to just flatten the namespace for relevant
> cross-registry objects, like aut-num, inetnum, route, route6, inet6num,
> mntner. This will provide us with tons of benefits without need to
> upgrade any tools.
>
> Example: IANA handed down the block which contains AS15562 to RIPE, RIPE
> assigned it to me. It should not exist in the APNIC database (or any
> other IRR), not even as APNIC::AS15562. Same goes for IP space.
>
> However I don't feel religious about this direction and look forward to
> discussion.
>
> Maybe we should organise a "cross-registry authentication" BOF at the
> next RIPE meeting where RIPE, APNIC & AFRINIC staff + stakeholders from
> db-wg & routing-wg?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>
> Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged,
> confidential and is intended exclusively for the addressee. The views
> expressed may not be official policy, but the personal views of the
> originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by
> return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce,
> distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone.
> Please note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communication
> through our internal and external networks. SKY and the SKY marks are
> trademarks of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky International AG
> and are used under licence. British Sky Broadcasting Limited (Registration
> No. 2906991), Sky-In-Home Service Limited (Registration No. 2067075) and
> Sky Subscribers Services Limited (Registration No. 2340150) are direct or
> indirect subsidiaries of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Registration
> No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this paragraph are
> incorporated in England and Wales and share the same registered office at
> Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/routing-wg/attachments/20150121/69b484be/attachment.html>