[db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Edward Shryane
eshryane at ripe.net
Mon Feb 14 09:17:33 CET 2022
Hello Jeroen, Firstly apologies for the delay in finding a solution to the /48 restriction on "geofeed:". I'm discussing a possible alternative with our Legal department, and hope to have an answer for you and the DB-WG soon. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC > On 11 Feb 2022, at 17:16, Jeroen Massar <jeroen at massar.ch> wrote: > >> Hi Job, Colleagues, >>> On 3 Jan 2022, at 13:36, Job Snijders via db-wg <db-wg at ripe.net> wrote: >>> >>> ... >>> I appreciate concerns about privacy, but I'm not wholly convinced >>> restricting /48s from having a proper 'geofeed:' attribute is the best >>> path forward. >>> >>> How does the working group feel about this restriction? Is it useful? >>> Should it be lifted? If the latter, what would be the process? >>> >> I will ask our Legal team to re-examine the prefix size restriction and keep you and the DB-WG informed. >> Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC > > Hi Ed, > > Did something come out of this? > > It is a very silly restriction, especially for PI /48's but also for the simple fact that one can register very small prefixes (I've done IPv4 /28 and IPv6 /56) in the actual geofeeds file. > > Greets, > Jeroen >
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]