Dear colleagues,
Here is the impact analysis on the proposal to require the suffix '-MNT' when
creating new MNTNER objects.
(1) Impact to Whois Update
When creating an MNTNER object, an additional syntax check will be performed on
the MNTNER name to require an -MNT suffix.
If this suffix is not present in the MNTNER name, the create request will FAIL
with an error:
***Error: Syntax error in <name>
This error message is consistent with the existing syntax checks on the MNTNER
name.
For this year so far, approximately 40% of all MNTNER objects created have an
-MNT suffix. Database users will need to adjust how they create MNTNER objects
to take this new rule into account.
This change will not affect existing MNTNER objects, which can be updated or
deleted as before.
This change will also not affect references to MNTNER objects from other object
types, an -MNT suffix will not be required on the mntner name.
(2) Impact to Whois Query
We do not expect any impact to Whois query.
(3) Impact to Existing Data
Approximately 36% of existing MNTNER objects are named without an -MNT suffix.
No cleanup of existing data will be performed.
(4) Impact to Whois documentation
The RIPE NCC will also update the RIPE database documentation with the syntax
change.
(5) Release timeline
We expect this change to take a short amount of time to implement, and will
include the change in the Whois 1.99 release after the RIPE81 meeting.
As usual, we will deploy the release to the Release Candidate environment for 2
weeks before production, to allow for testing.
If you have any questions or feedback on this plan, please let me know.
Regards
Ed Shryane
RIPE NCC
> On 30 Sep 2020, at 21:43, William Sylvester via db-wg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> db-wg members,
>
> The chairs of the database working group believe there is a consensus to have
> a standardised name format for creating new MNTNER objects. There was talk of
> a prefix (MNT-) or a suffix (-MNT). When creating a new standard it doesn't
> really make sense to introduce a standard with multiple formats. As there are
> currently 36347 MNTNERs that end with -MNT and 12480 MNTNERs that start with
> MNT-, we suggest that the standard should be to end with -MNT.
>
> We ask the RIPE NCC to take the next steps in moving this request forward,
> conducting an impact analysis, and proceed with implementation.
>
> Best regards.
>
> William & denis
> db-wg chairs
