Re: [db-wg] RIPE DB question

["Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" <]

Max Tulyev wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 
>>>So if you need to keep control on objects - keep your mnt-by there.
>>
>>In this case customer must ask LIR to do any changes in RIPE DB.
>>It is not a best choise, I think.
> 
> 
> But it is only choise you have if you need to keep control, for example, to 
> collect yearly payments for PI/AS as it usually is in RU/UA.

  ... another approach could be to link a resource object to more than 1
  maintainer. As the access checks are performed on a "logical OR" basis,
  this allows modifications to be submitted by anyone holding a credential
  as listed in _any_ of the mntner: objects.

  We are doing that with some (legacy) objects of our customers.

  Works pretty well. Of course it assumes a collaborative environment,
  and/or some sort of incentive for the customer to not remove "your"
  maintainer (e.g. relying on your connectivity :-).

  It might work in your environment, and it might not be feasible.

  Whenever this approach is implemented, it is useful to properly
  configure notifications. This at least gets you a mail message if
  "something goes wrong" withthe collaboration....

  Wilfried.