Separate attributes vs context-aware software [RE: RPS WG (was Re: [Rps] Re: Latest RPSLng draft)]

Pekka Savola wrote:

> I'll try to summarize the loooo-ong thread somehow.  Mark believes 
> that the current RPSLng proposition unnecessarily adds complexity to 
> the operators' use of the language, as e.g. IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, 
> peerings, etc. could all be facilitated by redefining the current 
> attributes etc. -- and whichever would be returned could be evaluated 
> based on the context.  As the number of operators using the language 
> is extremely high (and we'd like it to be higher :-) compared to the 
> registry/tool implementations, Mark argues that optimizing for the 
> simplicity to the operators is the most important goal.

That pretty much summarises my position.

I will also comment that when we migrated from RIPE-181 to RPSL we also 
had a backward compatibility problem but that didn't seem to be a 
problem back then so I don't see why it's now suddenly a problem.

Mark.