Hi, On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 12:31:33PM +0200, Remco van Mook wrote:
following up on my presentation at RIPE 88, please find below a draft version of the policy proposal for simplifying the status of number resource records. I wanted to get this out much earlier, my apologies for the delay.
My understanding of the current status: values is to document contractual relationships regarding a particular database object - did the NCC assign this? Is this a hierarchical LIR structure? Is this some legacy space that is under a particular contract framework with the RIPE NCC? Who is the authority on what can or can not be done with a given bunch of numbers? I do like this interpretation of status: and want to keep it. Thus, simplification of status: values would either take away documentation (bad) or would need a simplification of contractual variants (not covered by this proposal, because not APWG merits). We might consider changing the contract structure (like, doing away with indirect contracts through a sponsoring LIR) - which is NCC services or AGM - but discussion about the consequences for status: needs to come afterwards, not before that. Short form: do not try to press complex reality into simple database formats, because that does not yield useful results, even if tempting. Oppose. Gert Doering -- having an o-with-dots in his name... -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler, Sebastian Cler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279