AW: [db-wg] Adding route objects
- Previous message (by thread): AW: [db-wg] Adding route objects
- Next message (by thread): AW: [db-wg] Adding route objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Fredrik Widell
fredrik at sunet.se
Thu Apr 6 10:29:26 CEST 2006
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Apr 05, Winfried Haug <wh at germany.com> wrote: > >>> I would even argue that the WG should consider allowing whoever controls >>> mnt-routes OR the referenced aut-num object to remove (not create) a >>> route/route6 object even if the request is not authenticated by both >>> maintainers. >> this would not help in our case and i assume many ISPs might have the >> same scenario. > Yes, I understand this and I support your proposal. > What I am proposing is an additional change to solve the second part of > the problem (how to remove old route objects when the old ISP is not > cooperating). Well, if the maintainer of the inetnum, and the maintainer of the origin-as for the to-be-registered-route-object agree and can send a pgp-signed, or whatever auth they use, object to ripedb, it should be registered, either with a warning stating there already exists a route-object, (which actually would be better for customers that are changing isp's since the filters for their coming global transit would work directly), or that the existing route-object simply is removed and the new one installed, I would prefer to be able to have multiple route-objects (as was possible earlier in ripedb), and to manually clean the database when customers sucessfully have changed global transit. > > -- Best regards /Fredrik ------------------------------------------------------- KTHNOC, KTH, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden +46 8 790 65 17 -------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message (by thread): AW: [db-wg] Adding route objects
- Next message (by thread): AW: [db-wg] Adding route objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]