Yes, thats exactly the kind of thing I am talking about, and I welcome your initiative, and I think its good its exposed here so routing-wg people can reflect on it. Clearly, its not only a DB-WG question!
The other part of the story is a concern I have heard stated in DB-WG that 'referential integrity' is very hard to maintain in a database when it refers to external objects, which may cease to exist asynchronously because the constraint cannot be maintained between disparate independent sources. I think that problem is a general problem, and cannot be fixed. I worry, that this may be a 'blocker' for some people. But, I think the "win" in permitting APNIC::named-object references inside RIPE and vice-versa is very big. -G On 20 January 2015 at 15:30, Job Snijders <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I assume you are talking about cross-registry authorisation for creation > of route objects? > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:17:24PM -0200, George Michaelson wrote: > > I am getting a sense DB-WG is thinking about RPSL, the DB and the > problem. > > I say this, because Its always amused me there are two WG to discuss one > > problem depending on how you approach it. If you come at it > > routing-centric, its in the routing WG. if you come at it as a DB > > proponent, its in the DB-WG. If you come at it as how RPSL is used, its a > > routing problem. if you come at it as how RPSL is implemented, its a DB > > problem. > > > > So.. maybe this is a time to say "hmm. is it time we had a joint sitting > of > > parliament, both houses, to discuss the issue" and deal with it jointly, > so > > both sides agree on what is, or is not, a problem? > > In a recent meeting between DB-WG Chairs & RIPE NCC staff, we as DB-WG > chairs requested that RIPE NCC create a proposal to provide cross-RIR > authorisation for at least APNIC, RIPE & AFRINIC (given the common > codebase). > > During the discussion at least one very important prerequisite came up: > we need to flatten the maintainer namespace between these three > registries. E.g. if SNIJDERS-MNT exists in RIPE NCC's DB it should not > exist in the other two. > > Kind regards, > > Job >
