Hi Denis, Just for my understanding. For such clean-ups is there any need to have a policy to remove certain object references or this comes under RIR housekeeping can be done once problem has been identified by the community consensus. Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Denis Walker <denis@ripe.net> wrote:

Hi all

In the DB WG session this afternoon we only touch on the fact that this project is ongoing. I go into more details on the problems we have with this project with my short presentation in the Routing WG tomorrow.

Regards denis

On 14/05/2014 10:28, Rob Evans wrote:

Folks,

For any RPSL lovers among you that weren't at the Address Policy WG meeting this morning, the topic of cleaning up referenced AS numbers came up again. There are about ~2,000 16 bits ASNs that have been returned, but are still referenced in the import/export lines of other aut-num objects, either directly or via as-sets.

There will be more discussion of this in the Database WG this afternoon, but I thought I'd mention it here as it has implications for those on this list that use RPSL.

Cheers, Rob

Hi Aftab, Aftab Siddiqui wrote:

Hi Denis, Just for my understanding. For such clean-ups is there any need to have a policy to remove certain object references or this comes under RIR housekeeping can be done once problem has been identified by the community consensus.

my point of view as a DB-Co-chair (at the moment) is that we don't need a formal policy, if the problem is well understood, we do have a sound proposal how to move forward and there is no severe impact on daily operations for the users of the DB services; (and no substantial disagreement). In case we hit a roadblock and find out that the/a proposed solution/s would require major changes for the resource holders, or the managment of number resources in our region, then for all means, we would use the formal PDP, imho.

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

Best reegards, Wilfried.

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Denis Walker <denis@ripe.net> wrote:

...

Hi all

In the DB WG session this afternoon we only touch on the fact that this project is ongoing. I go into more details on the problems we have with this project with my short presentation in the Routing WG tomorrow.

Regards denis

On 14/05/2014 10:28, Rob Evans wrote:

Folks,

For any RPSL lovers among you that weren't at the Address Policy WG meeting this morning, the topic of cleaning up referenced AS numbers came up again. There are about ~2,000 16 bits ASNs that have been returned, but are still referenced in the import/export lines of other aut-num objects, either directly or via as-sets.

There will be more discussion of this in the Database WG this afternoon, but I thought I'd mention it here as it has implications for those on this list that use RPSL.

Cheers, Rob

Rob Evans wrote:

Hi,

...

my point of view as a DB-Co-chair (at the moment) is that we don't need a formal policy, if the problem is well understood, we do have a sound proposal how to move forward and there is no severe impact on daily operations for the users of the DB services; (and no substantial disagreement).

For those who weren't present in the routing working group this afternoon, either physically or virtually, there was a strong sentiment that the RIPE NCC should *not* edit other objects to remove references to reclaimed ASNs.

Send out warnings, by all means, but editing other objects would open up a can of worms that is best left sealed under pressure.

Thanks for this feedback, noted! Wilfried.

Cheers, Rob