<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yiv8435832676"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500380216829_15480"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500380216829_15479" style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px;"><div dir="ltr" id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206838">Colleagues<br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206878"><br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206879">The DB-WG co-chairs would like to try to resolve (or close and document that as a consensus) another long standing issue, out of region ROUTE(6) and AUT-NUM objects in the RIPE Database (NWI-5).<br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206880"><br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206881">We would like to start off the (final?) round of discussions on this topic with a question. Should the RIPE Database be used as an open, free, global Internet Routing Registry (IRR)? If the answer is 'yes' then perhaps we should allow the routing policy of any global resource to be documented in the RIPE Database as a choice by the resource holder and move on to address the issues surrounding this process. If the answer is 'no' then perhaps we shouldn't allow any routing policy for any non RIPE resources (not selectively try to expel one group of ROUTE objects).<br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206882"><br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206883">cheers<br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206884">denis <br></div><div id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206886" dir="ltr">co-chair DB-WG<br id="yiv8435832676yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1500110910547_206885"><br></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>