how about
Ideally, RPSL would be augmented to define a new RPSL geofeed:
attribute in the inetnum: class. Until such time, this document
defines the syntax of a Geofeed remarks: attribute which contains an
HTTPS URL of a geofeed file. The format MUST be as in this example,
"remarks: Geofeed " followed by a URL which will vary.
inetnum: 192.0.2.0/24 # example
remarks: Geofeed https://example.com/geofeed.csv
While we leave global agreement of RPSL modification to the relevant
parties, we suggest that a proper geofeed: attribute in the inetnum:
class be simply "geofeed: " followed by a URL which will vary.
inetnum: 192.0.2.0/24 # example
geofeed: https://example.com/geofeed.csv
Any particular inetnum: object MAY have, at most, one geofeed
reference, whether a remark: or a proper geofeed: attribute when one
is defined.
(speaking as an individual)
Let's assume this becomes RFC9999, and I claim I implement/support
RFC9999. What does that mean? MAY or SHOULD or MUST I support the
geofeed: attribute?
I don't think that "ideally ... would be" or "suggest" help here.
Robert
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
