You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > RIPE Forum
RIPE Forum v1.4.1

Database Working Group

Threaded
Collapse

[db-wg] Regarding NWI-8 phase 2 - user defined auth groups

User Image

Tore Anderson

2020-05-14 16:24:22 CET

The following was stated in the db-wg session just now (https://ripe80.ripe.net/archives/video/377/ @ 1:03):

«Phase 2 was user defined authentication groups. Nobody objected to this, but really only the proposer actually said it was a good idea.»

This is categorically false. I did not propose this, nor did I think it was a particularly useful feature (at least not to myself).

For the record, the thread where I proposed this feature starts here:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/db-wg/PGExMTJhNDAyLWUxYTAtZDhlNS1lZDg0LTczOGMxYzc0MTQ4NkBmdWQubm8+

I believe it was Nick Hilliard who initially came up with the group idea:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/db-wg/PGExMTJhNDAyLWUxYTAtZDhlNS1lZDg0LTczOGMxYzc0MTQ4NkBmdWQubm8+#PDQ1OTM5YTU0LThmNGMtNTFiYS05YWIxLTJkNzhlOWM0ZmFmNkBmb29iYXIub3JnPg==

While I did not have any objections per se to this feature being implemented as well, I did voice a concern that it would constitute feature creep that would potentially complicate the implementation of the core of my proposal (which in the end was implemented as phase 1, fortunately):

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/db-wg/PGExMTJhNDAyLWUxYTAtZDhlNS1lZDg0LTczOGMxYzc0MTQ4NkBmdWQubm8+#PGVkOWZmNTg5LTkwYzktNzFhNS01ZDkyLWFhNWFkNTRlNzkxYUBmdWQubm8+

So let me for the record categorically state that I do not care about the user defined authentication groups phase of NWI-8. I am perfectly happy with the already implemented phase 1, as that covers everything I ever wanted from the «magic maintainer» proposal of mine that eventually became NWI-8.

Tore

ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk

2020-05-14 16:49:55 CET

 Hi Tore

Sorry if you misunderstood what I meant. I didn't say that 'you' proposed this. I said only 'the proposer' of having user defined groups wanted it. I couldn't remember who it was who suggested it. It may have even been myself who first suggested that this 'could' be extended to user groups and then picked up by someone else :)
cheersdenis
co-chair DB-WG
    On Thursday, 14 May 2020, 16:24:47 CEST, Tore Anderson via db-wg <db-wg _at_ ripe _dot_ net> wrote:  
 
 The following was stated in the db-wg session just now (https://ripe80.ripe.net/archives/video/377/ @ 1:03):

«Phase 2 was user defined authentication groups. Nobody objected to this, but really only the proposer actually said it was a good idea.»

This is categorically false. I did not propose this, nor did I think it was a particularly useful feature (at least not to myself).

For the record, the thread where I proposed this feature starts here:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/db-wg/PGExMTJhNDAyLWUxYTAtZDhlNS1lZDg0LTczOGMxYzc0MTQ4NkBmdWQubm8+

I believe it was Nick Hilliard who initially came up with the group idea:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/db-wg/PGExMTJhNDAyLWUxYTAtZDhlNS1lZDg0LTczOGMxYzc0MTQ4NkBmdWQubm8+#PDQ1OTM5YTU0LThmNGMtNTFiYS05YWIxLTJkNzhlOWM0ZmFmNkBmb29iYXIub3JnPg==

While I did not have any objections per se to this feature being implemented as well, I did voice a concern that it would constitute feature creep that would potentially complicate the implementation of the core of my proposal (which in the end was implemented as phase 1, fortunately):

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/db-wg/PGExMTJhNDAyLWUxYTAtZDhlNS1lZDg0LTczOGMxYzc0MTQ4NkBmdWQubm8+#PGVkOWZmNTg5LTkwYzktNzFhNS01ZDkyLWFhNWFkNTRlNzkxYUBmdWQubm8+

So let me for the record categorically state that I do not care about the user defined authentication groups phase of NWI-8. I am perfectly happy with the already implemented phase 1, as that covers everything I ever wanted from the «magic maintainer» proposal of mine that eventually became NWI-8.

Tore