[db-wg] Country attribute to be removed?

  Dear Hank,

>Can we have a list of who was in attendance,

  ...while I think the "who" (explicit list of names) is less relevant,
  I guess you can get that piece of information from the nice folks at
  meeting at ripe.net ...

>and how many people voted in favor of removing the country attribute

  usually we do not conduct formal votes, but rather try to find a common
  position regarding a particular proposal. The number of people in the
  room is (as usual) part of my WG summary report to the plenary which is
  available from the net at

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-48/presentations/ripe48-plenary-db.pdf

>and whether people realized that the country attribute is used by organizations?

  Yes indeed, please see slide #4, item 1. and slide #5 action point AP 48.1

  And in particular there was concern that the use of this entry is less
  than helpful for some parties because there is no way of making sure
  that data is "correct" (for any definition of correct [1] :-) and relevant
  for the particular use...

>And what is the rule on consensus - does attendance at the RIPE conference
>have more weight than discussion in the online mailing list?

  Yes, and no, but I presume this is off-topic in that context?

>-Hank

  Wilfried.
  
[1] one of the questions for which we could not find an answer is:
    which country to put into the object -

    . the country of residence of the LIR

    . the country of residence of the admin-c: of an piece of address
      space?

    . the country off "deployment" (which is fuzzy in itself...)
  ______________________________________________________________________