[ncc-services-wg] Re: [enum-wg] New Documents available: RIPE-384, RIPE-385]

On Sep 08, Andrei Robachevsky <andrei at ripe.net> wrote:

> Yes, but in the case of the RIPE Database we'd rather err to be more
> formal because of high visibility of changes and dependencies.
I agree, thank you for bringing this issue to the appropriate WG.

FWIW, I really cannot see a valid reason for such a change.
It should be obvious that in the context of org-type attributes the
words "NON-REGISTRY" have a specific meaning, which does not need to be
the same (and cannot be the same!) of the semantic of the word
"registry" in every other possible context.
I would appreciate if RIPE NCC would not waste resources implementing
and documenting new attribute values for every tiny group that feels
to not be described in a sufficiently excruciating level of detail by
the available choices.

But maybe it's just me, and Mr. Verschuren should explain more clearly
why he believes that the status of his organization as an ENUM registry
should be relevant in the context of org-type attributes, possibly
without resorting to "sentimental issues".

-- 
ciao,
Marco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/enum-wg/attachments/20060908/de77600f/attachment.sig>