Obsoleting "connect"
- Previous message (by thread): Obsoleting "connect"
- Next message (by thread): Obsoleting "connect"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net
Thu Sep 23 17:51:35 CEST 1993
> Havard Eidnes <Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no> writes: > > I tend to agree with you here but before we change the database config to > > make connect optional I guess we should get the okay from the chair who > > will be coordinating the new definitions for the objects. As long as we do not hear anyone with a "show-stopper" on this list we will make the field mandatory after an OK from Wilfried Woeber. > > Also, we can take it a step further in that if the connect field is there > > it is LOCAL (something to add to the syntax checker ;-(). > > I was thinking of a multi-step phase-in of the new policy, and that this > would be the natural next step. Or do we just jump into it with both feet > rigt away? This is *not* a good idea to do before the routing registry is in place. There are still a number of poeople out there who use this to generate configurations. They need some warning and an alternative. Daniel
- Previous message (by thread): Obsoleting "connect"
- Next message (by thread): Obsoleting "connect"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]