Hi Chriztoffer,
On 7 Sep 2020, at 12:45, Chriztoffer Hansen via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
On 07/09/2020 12:16, ripedenis--- via db-wg wrote:
enforce this on all 'new' MNTNER object creations I'm all for enforcing this syntax per you comment above.
Makes sense to _always_ be able to expect certain syntax rules for different DB objects types.
The mntner name currently conforms to the <object-name> syntax defined in the RPSL RFC: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2622#section-2 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2622#section-2> There is no requirement to prefix or postfix with "MNT" at all.
So if we go down this route where do we draw the line?
Current standpoint: For a "phase I". I would suggest enforcing syntax rules for _new_ objects.
A syntax rule change can be done without needing a cleanup, if only enforced for new objects.
Future standpoint up for discussion: For a "phase II", walkthrough current DB primary keys to get a scope of how many objects primary keys would need to be updated to follow "phase I" enforced syntax rules(?)
I checked the RIPE database and found 12480 mntners starting with "MNT-", 36347 mntners ending with "-MNT", and 7772 for all other names.
-- Kind regards, CHRIZTOFFER
Users can also report inaccurate information in the RIPE database to the RIPE NCC: https://www.ripe.net/contact-form <https://www.ripe.net/contact-form> We can contact the user and ask them to correct or remove the object. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC