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/routing-wg@ripe.net/
[routing-wg] Adding "::" notation to RIPE DB
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] Adding "::" notation to RIPE DB
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] Adding "::" notation to RIPE DB
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carlos Friaças
cfriacas at fccn.pt
Fri Nov 11 08:59:49 CET 2022
Hi, On Fri, 11 Nov 2022, Cynthia Revström via routing-wg wrote: > In my opinion, at this point, when all RIRs have their own > authoritative IRR databases requiring authorization*, we should only > really consider those** as authoritative. Strong support!!! Which RIR IRR databases are at this point *still* without mandatory authorization? > I see very limited purpose for any other IRR DB. Unless one loves bogus IRR information, of course :-)) > Sure there are still plenty of objects in those other IRRs but those > objects should probably be migrated over to the relevant RIR managed > IRRs. Yes, precisely! If they are not bogus! :-)) (...) Regards, Carlos
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] Adding "::" notation to RIPE DB
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] Adding "::" notation to RIPE DB
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]