On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Rimas Janusauskas wrote:
[skip] RJ> 2. If accept your proposal, "organization" attribute with unique handle RJ> like person/role MUST substitute inetnum(s), which became RJ> [mandatory] [multiple] [look-up key] RJ> attribute? I'm not sure that RIPE community is ready for such significant RJ> changes...
I'm very much surprized by 'multiple' status of proposed attribute. How can netblock belong to more than one company (provided they are in compliance with RIPE-185) ? Yes, there is also some possible problems with either renaming (e.g., by splitting/merging) organization or other ways of changing the "owner" of netblock.
Mea cuppa! of course, it should be read 2. <...> "organization" object. Rimas