"Willem van der Scheun, SARA, +31 20 5923079" <SCHEUN@SARA.NL> writes: * Tony, * * This sounds at first sight as a good idea. Fairly dynamic and distributed a * nd * the like. Right. * A remark about the possibility as building access lists and the like. You c * an * do that quite easily of course, but I would like to have one way of buildin * g * access lists (and BGP network lists for that matter) from the RIPE database * . * Currently we are using nlc. I would definitely prefer that we have ONE tool * to * generate the lists. Apart form this other nice solutions may be available. * Talking about this, will te the tool the NCC is working upon (as was report * ed * at the last RIPE), be based on nlc, or is it completely new? Sure - this was only an example of doing things interactively with the information is all. The tools we are working on will be able to make use of nlc also and generate both ASpath lists and network based lists. * * If you delegate zones should this delegation also be put in the AS object l * ike * it is in the domain object? Delegation can not be done to the guardian (I g * uess * that's why you used double quotes). For AS1103 (SURFnet) the guardian is a * alias for a list of responsibles. If you put delegation info in the AS info * , Well the thing is. Whatever way the update is done it will be some form of file maintainence and whether that is here or there, to me at least doesn't make a lot of difference even if it is multiple people maintaining the zone. * should this state nserver as well as zone-c and tech-c? * Possibly if it is decided this is how the update procedure is done. * Willem --T