[db-wg] Locking unmaintained PERSON and ROLE objects in the RIPE Database
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Locking unmaintained PERSON and ROLE objects in the RIPE Database
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Locking unmaintained PERSON and ROLE objects in the RIPE Database
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Job Snijders
job at ntt.net
Fri Apr 8 13:23:04 CEST 2016
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: > Peter Koch wrote: > > From a data protection perspective, this cool down phase appears > > rather long, especially given that even after following (3b) there's > > no proposed way to actively delete the locked (and re-instantiated) > > object. What's the perceived drawback of few days only? > > Is there a particular hurry to delete these objects? 180 days sounds > fine to me. I was one of the people suggestion this 180 days value, mostly because it is hard to assess what tangible benefits a shorter period would offer. I envision that 180 days is long enough to cover gaps in business processes between an object becoming unreferenced, remaining orphaned for a period (for instance maybe during a migration), and subsequently being attached to a new object again. Admittedly its suggested so to stay on the cautious side. Kind regards, Job
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Locking unmaintained PERSON and ROLE objects in the RIPE Database
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Locking unmaintained PERSON and ROLE objects in the RIPE Database
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]