New object

On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Rimas Janusauskas wrote:

[skip]
RJ> 2. If accept your proposal, "organization" attribute with unique handle
RJ> like person/role MUST substitute inetnum(s), which became
RJ>      [mandatory]  [multiple]     [look-up key]            
RJ> attribute? I'm not sure that RIPE community is ready for such significant
RJ> changes...

I'm very much surprized by 'multiple' status of proposed attribute. How
can netblock belong to more than one company (provided they are in
compliance with RIPE-185) ? Yes, there is also some possible problems with
either renaming (e.g., by splitting/merging) organization or other ways of
changing the "owner" of netblock.

RJ> 3. You know, if not kept up to date the object will not work. Who will
RJ> be responsible for it - customer or ISP?

Yeah, and this is next good and in no way easy-to-answer question...

RJ> Good point to start/close discussion?  ;-)

Definitely :)

Sincerely,
D.Marck                                   [DM5020, DM268-RIPE, DM3-RIPN]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck at rinet.ru ***
------------------------------------------------------------------------