Right now, I think we only need to implement the "::" notation in the RFC2725. For this I think RFC2725 is the result of the standard process and there is no need to re-open RPSL WG to repeat that again. However the reason we proposed to implement "::" notation is to address the need for EXTERNAL REFERENCE. For that I think it might be necessary to start the WG discussion on how do we support the EXTERNAL REFERENCE in the near future. Let's just start implementing the "::" notation while we can also start the discussion on the topics of EXTERNAL REFERENCE. I don't know if here is the proper place to start the discussion or we should go somewhere else ? Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu@cw.net

-----Original Message----- From: Mark Prior [mailto:mrp@mrp.net] Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2002 8:08 AM To: curtis@fictitious.org Cc: Lu, Ping; db-wg@ripe.net; irrtoolset@ripe.net Subject: Re: Proposal for adding external repository reference to import/expor t attributes

At 3:10 PM -0400 23/8/02, Curtis Villamizar wrote:

...

It is possible to reactivate a WG on the mailing list only, for the purpose of updating an existing RFC and not having a meeting. This was done with TCPLW for RFC1323. Cengiz would need to update RPSL (as primary author and keeper of the source of that document).

Is the only change needed at this point the :: notation to indicate external repository? If so, no change is needed to RFC-2622 since the :: notation is called for in RFC-2725 and it wouldn't be worth updating RFC-2622 just for that.

What you really need to do is get Larry Blunk to update the ISI tools.

Curtis,

I wasn't the person suggesting making changes, I was just suggesting that you needed to follow a procedure in order to make it happen and couldn't just "fix" it in software. I would suggest if people think this is a good idea (and I haven't really thought about it) then perhaps merging it into the RPSLng work would be the way to go.

Mark.