Dear Ed, WG, Thank you for the update!
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 03:56:00PM +0100, Edward Shryane via db-wg wrote: > Accordingly, we will allow "geofeed:" on ALLOCATED PA or top-level > ASSIGNED PI (for IPv4) and ALLOCATED-BY-RIR on top-level ASSIGNED PI > (for IPv6). Perhaps a typo slipped in: I assume "on top-level" in the above sentence was meant to read "or top-level"? > We will also start enforcing the same validation on "remarks: geofeed" > as on "geofeed:" for consistency. I guess imposing restrictions on the contents on "remarks:" fields serves to counter the argument "no such restriction exists for the remarks: field", offered in the initial posting [1]. In effect this means the flexibility of the "remarks:" field is being downgraded because of a dispute between [email protected] and the RIPE NCC legal team. I don't see much benefit to that aspect of the proposed course of action. I'd like to suggest this NEW and ADDITIONAL restriction is reconsidered. Kind regards, Job [1]: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-January/007246.html -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/db-wg
