Special ftp access for IRR?

> 
>   * people are being asked to register in multiple .db's since they have 
>   * several connections and the various providers can't or won't trust the
>   * "other guy".  MCI has the policy that you must register in their .db.
>   * It will be interesting to see how this plays when/if MCI enters the Euro
>   * market.  Then their clients will need to register in the RIPE.db and the
>   * MCI.db, just they way they are asked to in the US.  
>   * 
> One should be careful when stating other companies policies. 

I'm only quoting a note from MCI. 
If you'd like, I'll forward the note to this list.  

This specific implementation is not germain to this list other than as an
example of the need to support registration in multiple databases. 

> On the general issue of dfk solution, I do not believe forwarding updates
> around scales at all and also from a service aspect places a reliance on others
> to do the right thing which right now is probably not such a god idea unless
> we get strong agreement on authority of data. This get harder as more RRs 
> come into play.

In total agreement here.

> The actual data maintenance of the files is fine though providing it can be
> automated  and can have the needed notification of change built in.

Yup, this too.
 
> 		--Tony.

--bill



-------- Logged at  Tue Feb 28 18:31:18 MET 1995  ---------