Yes, thats exactly the kind of thing I am talking about, and I welcome your initiative, and I think its good its exposed here so routing-wg people can reflect on it. Clearly, its not only a DB-WG question!

The other part of the story is a concern I have heard stated in DB-WG that 'referential integrity' is very hard to maintain in a database when it refers to external objects, which may cease to exist asynchronously because the constraint cannot be maintained between disparate independent sources.

I think that problem is a general problem, and cannot be fixed. I worry, that this may be a 'blocker' for some people.

But, I think the "win" in permitting APNIC::named-object references inside RIPE and vice-versa is very big.

-G

On 20 January 2015 at 15:30, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:
Hi,

I assume you are talking about cross-registry authorisation for creation
of route objects?

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:17:24PM -0200, George Michaelson wrote:
> I am getting a sense DB-WG is thinking about RPSL, the DB and the problem.
> I say this, because Its always amused me there are two WG to discuss one
> problem depending on how you approach it. If you come at it
> routing-centric, its in the routing WG. if you come at it as a DB
> proponent, its in the DB-WG. If you come at it as how RPSL is used, its a
> routing problem. if you come at it as how RPSL is implemented, its a DB
> problem.
>
> So.. maybe this is a time to say "hmm. is it time we had a joint sitting of
> parliament, both houses, to discuss the issue" and deal with it jointly, so
> both sides agree on what is, or is not, a problem?

In a recent meeting between DB-WG Chairs & RIPE NCC staff, we as DB-WG
chairs requested that RIPE NCC create a proposal to provide cross-RIR
authorisation for at least APNIC, RIPE & AFRINIC (given the common
codebase).

During the discussion at least one very important prerequisite came up:
we need to flatten the maintainer namespace between these three
registries. E.g. if SNIJDERS-MNT exists in RIPE NCC's DB it should not
exist in the other two.

Kind regards,

Job