Modifying 'person:' objects

Are you proposing to change the RIPE-181 version of RIPE-DB software (v2.x)
or
the upcoming RPSL version of  RIPE-DB software (v3.x) ?

Ping Lu
Cable & Wireless USA
Network Tools and Analysis Group
W: +1-703-292-2359
E: plu at cw.net


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carsten Schiefner [mailto:carsten.schiefner at tcpip-gmbh.de]
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 8:03 AM
> To: db-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: Modifying 'person:' objects
> 
> 
> Colleagues,
> 
> as a follow-up of the short discussion we have had last week 
> during RIPE
> 38 I'd like to continue this discussion in the appropriate forum, the
> db-wg mailing list.
> 
> What from time to time really annoys me is the fact that you cannot
> change a person's name (necessary due to misspellings etc.) that is
> already referenced because the person's name together with the NIC
> handle is the primary key. You cannot delete and re-enter it either
> because it's already referenced. The only way to go is to 
> send an email
> to the human db processor ;-) 'ripe-dbm at ripe.net' to get the data
> changed manually. I consider this as not very efficient.
> 
> During the meeting we were told by Joao and/or Andrej that basically
> there is no further need to have person's name _AND_ NIC handle as the
> primary key, only the NIC handle would be enough. Anyhow, I wouldn't
> like to touch this pragma.
> 
> What I would like to propose is a second "pseudo" attribute 
> in addition
> to 'delete:' - having no documentation purpose but functionality: the
> "I really know what I am doing right at the moment" attribute
> ('irkwiadratm:' ;-). This second "pseudo" attribute overruns the above
> mentioned db pragma and forces a change in a person's name 
> (so 'force:'
> migt be better...).
> 
> Where I haven't made up my mind yet is the question whether 
> this always
> should apply or only in thoses cases when a person object is 
> maintainer
> protected. There might be further cases I have not in mind at 
> all at the
> moment - so...
> 
> Any comments will be appreciated.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 	-C.
> 
> 
>