Re: Modifying references to contact info in the RIPE DB
Hi Joao!
If the reference is by name then when I query the DB I will get the list of persons with that name, right?
Right.
Whether the object belongs to the person or not is not going to save this person from being contacted. From the point of view of the database and the user querying it, the object belongs to that person.
Right
The link is via a name.
Now we substitute the reference by name with a reference by nic handle pointing to the same person. What is the difference?
ALMOST NONE except that:
True, for the case where there is a strict one-to-one mapping, e.g the recursion using the name returns *one* object. What do you suggets to do with the case where the recursion, based on the names, returns a *set* of objects? I can see 2 approaches (at least): - do not perform the handle substitution for that referring object and put it on the list of those requiring human intervention - expand the xxxx-c: list (which? the tech-c:?) to refer to *all* objects, but by ref'ing their handles While human beings are quite clever in selecting the "proper" instance of a person: object (by looking at country, address, email,...) a script might be quite clueless with that respect :-) Wilfried. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber@CC.UniVie.ac.at Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Vienna University : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : RIPE-DB (&NIC) Handle: WW144 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : PGP public key ID 0xF0ACB369 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, I explicitly excluded those objects from this run. I can't possibly think of a simple script that can take that kind of decisions. I knew this thing was going to be a bit polemic so I am trying to split into smaller problems and stages that we can all agree to. Hopefully every step will reduce the number of objects that need repairs. And believe me, it's not the same to have to fix 250000 objects than to fix 25000. Somehow the latter seems a bit more feasible (from a "let's deal with this" attitude). The RIPE DB has been around for a long time and it's requirements and constraints have evolved a lot. I don't pretend to be able to solve all problems and certainly not all at once, but I think each step takes us closer. So, can we agree to proceed with our suggestion as stated below? ** Change references by names to references by nic handle where these are unique (there are not already more than two persons with the same referenced name). ** For the cases where the ambiguity is already there: we'll look at them, try to categorize them and maybe identify another subset which can be handled by drawing information from some other source. We'll get back to you with our suggestion (and we take the two you mention as input). Any input is most welcome. Regards, Joao "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" <woeber@cc.univie.ac.at> writes: * True, for the case where there is a strict one-to-one mapping, * e.g the recursion using the name returns *one* object. * * What do you suggets to do with the case where the recursion, based on * the names, returns a *set* of objects? * I can see 2 approaches (at least): * * - do not perform the handle substitution for that referring object * and put it on the list of those requiring human intervention * * - expand the xxxx-c: list (which? the tech-c:?) to refer to *all* * objects, but by ref'ing their handles * * While human beings are quite clever in selecting the "proper" instance * of a person: object (by looking at country, address, email,...) a script * might be quite clueless with that respect :-) * * Wilfried. * -------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber@CC.UniVie.ac.at * Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 * Vienna University : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 * Universitaetsstrasse 7 : RIPE-DB (&NIC) Handle: WW144 * A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : PGP public key ID 0xF0ACB369 * -------------------------------------------------------------------------- *
Hi,
So, can we agree to proceed with our suggestion as stated below? ** Change references by names to references by nic handle where these are unique (there are not already more than two persons with the same referenced name). **
Can we also decide that when a person decides she (sic) is not responsible for whatever record references hir, said person is allowed to have the reference removed ? (This problem exists already...) Bernard
Of course! And will gladly help s/he since that corrects an existing inconsistency in the DB. We do this all the time, whenever someone contacts us with this kind of request [although we do check it is not a case of someone trying to run away from their objects :-)] If you know anyone with that problem now, direct them to ripe-dbm@ripe.net, please. Joao Bernard Steiner <bs@eunet.ch> writes: * Hi, * * > So, can we agree to proceed with our suggestion as stated below? * > ** * > Change references by names to references by nic handle where these are uni * que * > (there are not already more than two persons with the same referenced name * ). * > ** * * Can we also decide that when a person decides she (sic) is not responsible * for whatever record references hir, said person is allowed to have the * reference removed ? * * (This problem exists already...) * * Bernard * *
participants (3)
-
Bernard Steiner -
Joao Luis Silva Damas -
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet