I think you are mixing up notifications with contacts here. Notifications are usually a list of one or more people who want to be notified when something changes. They may not be the same people as the admin-c, tech-c, abuse-c contacts who you would talk to if you have any issues/questions, who may also be different to the maintainers of the data.I am trying to understand how this change could {help,hinder} the APNIC problem of route objects which reference differently maintained AS and Inetnum objects, and the added complication of AS being vested from RIPE and Inetnum from APNIC.
I think stripping/changing the notify-on-ref mail might hinder this. It would be materially useful to preserve it, should exported IRR state be used at another site aggregating data, to contact the prime information manager.
This sounds like you want this notification to be sent if an ASN is associated with a ROUTE object. I presume you don't mean in the "origin:" as this has already been authorised by the ASN holder, so they already know of the association. Or do you want to cover the option of more than the maintainer of the AUT-NUM object wanting to know of the association?
I suspect RPSS/RPSAUTH issues are out of scope. Within one IRR/RPSL data set, I think the notify-on-ref thing would help the APNIC problem: it would make it easier for non-related maintainer to understand changes were being made in routing by address holders who want their AS to be in a route object, and participate.
-George
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 5:13 AM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
Hi Job,
> I think some notification feature would be nice to have, but we need to
> figure out what and when we expect notifications.
>
> I propose we dub the attribute for nice alignment with existing
> attributes:
>
> notify-on-ref: <email-address> optional, multi-valued
>
> Questions:Strong no
>
> - do you want a notification each time an object is updated and has
> a reference to your object?
> - or do you only want notifications when a reference inititally is
> added to an object? (spares you a daily mailbomb for daily updated
> objects)
Yes
> - do you want a notification when the reference is removed from an
> object?
Yes
> - In what classes do you want to set a notify-on-ref attribute? (I> think initially aut-num, as-set, rd-set)
Ack
No strong opinion on this one. I would say yes, unless someone comes up with a reason not to.
> - do we want the notify-on-ref email addresses to be set to
> unread@ripe.net upon NRTM/ftp export?
Yes, that sounds reasonable. Needing authorisation to be allowed to put information in the policy sounds like a good way to discourage people from updating/using them altogether. Let's not make things more difficult unless we really need to.
> Regarding authorisation, for me requiring authorisation to reference a
> given object is a bridge too far at this point in time. Quite some
> operators automatically generate an autnum, route-sets & as-sets on a
> daily basis to reject their policy, and I don't see an easy way to make
> this a painless adventure. Let's first do notifications and based on
> those experiences look further. ok?
Cheers!
Sander