RE: [db-wg] Re: [enum-wg] Proposal for new org-type

["Antoin Verschuren" <Antoin.Verschuren@localhost, db-wg@localhost]

leo vegoda wrote:

> Do people find org-type values like IANA, RIR, LIR and so on useful?
> If not, maybe we just need two values: REGISTRY for IANA, RIRs, LIRs,
> TLDs and Tier 1 ENUM operators and NON-REGISTRY for everyone else.
> However, if people really find the hierarchical distinctions in the
> current org-type values useful, maybe we need some additional
> granularity for the different kinds of domain registries?
> 
> If the extra granularity is useful, perhaps we need to allow
> organisations to have multiple org-type values? That's probably
> preferable to having multiple objects for a single organisation.

It depends on what is is supposed to be used for in the DB.
If is is needed to distinguish types of organisations when making
queries, the types makes sense.
But if it's only there to give a label and it is never used, it doesn't.

I wouldn't mind changing the "NON-REGISTRY" into "OTHER", like I now
have to apply for a RIPE meeting.
But on the other hand, if RIPE wants to use it as a differentiation of
their customers, and this would be expressed in the RIPE DB, I think
ENUM-REGISTRY would be appropriate, and I would also find it logical I
can register at a RIPE meeting as "ENUM-REGISTRY". It's then just a
customer type.

I can see a reason for the term "REGISTRY" if RIPE intends to expand
heir services to more than IP network services, and doesn't feel to
create a long list of different marketing terms for different
organisations. I work for a ccTLD registry that is not an LIR, and even
though that is a clear Internet registry function like IANA, RIR or LIR,
RIPE currently does not supply a service for that function that requires
an entry in the DB. 

Conclusion:
I can live with ENUM-REGISTRY, REGISTRY, OTHER or no org-type at all.
I cannot live with the org-type NON-REGISTRY. 

My prefference would be the ENUM-REGISTRY org-type.

Antoin Verschuren

Technical Advisor
Policy & Business Development
SIDN
Utrechtseweg 310
PO Box 5022
6802 EA Arnhem
The Netherlands

T +31 26 3525510
F +31 26 3525505
M +31 6 23368970
E antoin.verschuren@localhost
W http://www.sidn.nl/