[db-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal

Sanjaya,

Sanjaya wrote:
 >
> While we understand the need for strict naming convention
> to avoid name disputes, may I request that the rules and
> convention will not be hard coded in the software but put 
> in a customisable config file. 
> As a user of RIPE's whois software, APNIC might want to have 
> a slightly different naming convention & rules :-)

It should be fairly straightforward to modify the rules.  However, without 
seeing specific requirements it is hard to be certain!  ;)

>>May be included in any other object type.  It points to an 
>>existing organisation object representing the entity that 
>>holds the resource.  The value of this attribute is the ID of 
>>the organisation object.  It is mandatory in the aut-num 
>>objects, and inetnum and inet6num objects with 
>>"ALLOCATED-BY-IANA", "ALLOCATED-BY-RIR", "ALLOCATED-BY-RIR 
>>NON-PORTABLE", "ALLOCATED-BY-RIR PORTABLE" and 
>>"ALLOCATED-BY-RIR UNSPECIFIED" values.  It is optional in all 
>>other objects, and it is single valued in all objects.
> 
> 
> As we're talking about the use of the organisation object,
> can we use it to show delegation path (instead of overloading
> the status attribute above) in a resource object (i.e. aut-num,
> inetnum and inet6num). For example, if querying an inetnum,
> you get this response:
> 
> % whois 192.168.86.251
> 
> inetnum:      192.168.86.0 - 192.168.86.255
> netname:      EXAMPLE-NET-86
> descr:        Sample network
> registry:     ORG-RIPE1-RIPE
> custodian:    ORG-RSIS54-RIPE
> country:      NL
> admin-c:      JE1-RIPE
> tech-c:       JE2-RIPE
> [...]
> source:       RIPE
> 
> organisation: ORG-RIPE1-RIPE
<snip/>

This is indeed our thinking, or something very similar.  However, we want 
to do one step at a time.  We would like to add the organisation object 
first, and then introduce a new "status:" attribute and inetnum template 
to include a new reference to responsible organisation(s).

I think this is especially important given the input from the community 
that we need to make these changes as useful as possible to the users. 
Getting a 10 page proposal with 3 or 4 big changes makes it difficult to 
see the important details, at least for me.  :)

-- 
Shane Kerr
RIPE NCC