Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 18:59:03 MET From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" <Wilfried.Woeber@cc.univie.ac.at>

...

Anyhow, of course it should be kept if there is any use for it ! But I don't think that introducing an additional provider *attribute* within the inetnum object will need the design-work for a provider *object* to be finished. The only thing that should be finished is the decision about the provider IDs which will be used as a DB key.

Are you really talking "provider" (ISP) or are you talking "registry"? In many cases these happen to be the same (organisation) but this is not required.

Sorry for the mixup: "registry" (LIR) of course !

I think that we don't need the LIR info in objects describing *assigned* addresses because the IR that performed the assignment can be identified by looking at the less specific object(s).

Yes, nevertheless I would like it, because 1. it would simplify lookups 2. it would emphasize that the address is *assigned* to a customer but still bound to a specific LIR (if this is politically correct ?) !

...

Ok, let's finish this sidestep and find a solution for the country attribute.

I agree.

Really now ?-) However, we should restart the discussion after the "country" stuff has been solved.

The provider (or TLD admin) concept might become interesting again when we start to talk about hierarchical authorization for object creation, like route objects and domain objects :-)

Oh yea. Christian --- Christian Panigl : Vienna University Computer Center - ACOnet --- --- VUCC - ACOnet : -------------------------------------------- --- --- Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Internet: Christian.Panigl@CC.UniVie.ac.at --- --- A-1010 Vienna / Austria : Tel: +43 1 4065822-383 (Fax: -170) ---