RE: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:55:26 +0100
seems better but not perfect - the important thing is to get all databases
looking the same and using the same terms?
strictly speaking it is not "ASSIGNED-TO-END-USER" its
"ASSIGNED-TO-SUBNET-USER" for example it could be part of a DHCP dial up
pool and thus only " leased" for the duration of that connexion.
> At 11:56 AM 6/12/2002, Guy Davies wrote:
> >I tend to agree with Nigel, although I'd go for something even
> >plainer like DELEGATED-TO-LIR and ASSIGNED-TO-END-USER (I know
> >they're a bit verbose but they're absolutely clear ;-) It also makes
> >clear that addresses assigned to an LIR in the role of END-USER are
> >exactly that. That way, an individual who is struggling with English
> >as a second language (or even their first language ;-) can be
> >absolutely clear of the status of a range of addresses.
>
> This is an excellent idea. However I would use
> ALLOCATED_TO_LIR and ASSIGNED_TO_END_USER.
> That way we clarify the subtle difference while
> maintaining consistency with existing documentation.
>
> (If I remember correctly the term DELEGATED was suggested at the time,
> but not used because of its usage in the DNS context as well as
> the connotation of total transfer of authority over the resource which
> is not quite the case.)
>
> Daniel
