Hi Denis, > On 21 Feb 2022, at 17:10, denis walker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ed > > Can you clarify this comment... > >> >> Our Legal team have considered the concerns from a part of the community >> regarding the eligible size for “geofeed:” validation and concluded the >> following: >> Since resources with prefix size equal to the size distributed/registered by >> the RIPE NCC to a resource holder is not considered to be personal data, an >> equal prefix size may receive the “geofeed:” validation. >> >> 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). > > Are you saying you will ONLY allow geofeed on resources with these > status values? What about SUB-ALLOCATED PA and AGGREGATED-BY-LIR? The > nature of these status values suggests they are not personal data. >
Legal have made a distinction between the resources allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC and resources assigned on a second level by our members or provider independent resource holders. If SUB-ALLOCATED PA and AGGREGATED-BY-LIR are not personal data (since they are used for grouping network blocks together), then we can allow "geofeed:" on them. > "an equal prefix size may receive the “geofeed:” validation." > Or are you saying any object with a size equal to any allocation can > have a "geofeed:" attribute? That would mean a /24 for IPv4. > The RIPE NCC are creating /24 top-level allocations, but this size could also be used as a single (second level) assignment. However, we don't have a way (yet, see NWI-4) to distinguish between an allocation and assignment of the same size. Geofeed is allowed on a top-level resource but not on a more specific assignment within that. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC > cheers > denis > co-chair DB-WG -- 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
