update: minutes, DB-WG meeting, RIPE-23, Jan.96, Amsterdam

>From the minutes:

At 12:02 pm 21/3/1996, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
[...]
>  The Role: or NOC: object needs more thought and detailed definition.
>  There is still some uncertainty whether a full-blown new object (with a
>  handle) is really needed, or whether the person object can be extended.
>  Input was received from Michael H. Behringer that proposed a common
>  format for describing contact information, coverage and emergency
>  preocedures. This object is to be re-visited on the mailing list and a
>  decision about implementation is being sought on the list.
[...]
>Wilfried Woeber, Michael H. Behringer: To initiated discussion on the
>        mailing list about the need and possible format for a role: or
>        noc: object.

I sent out mail on this on 8. March 96, proposing to implement the role
object in the DB, because I think it is the "clean" way to implement e.g.
AS objects with. My mail led to a true storm of follow-up mails; well,
maybe not quite, there was one response from Joachim (thanks!). But as this
response was definitely positive, I guess we can conclude that we had 100%
agreement on this issue. :-)

Can we therefore consider this matter decided?

Michael