[DBWG] DBWG-2: proposal to auto-generate contents of the mandatory "changed" field in db objects.

Nishal Goburdhan nishal at controlfreak.co.za
Tue Aug 4 10:34:19 UTC 2020

On 2 Aug 2020, at 6:23, Ben Maddison wrote:

> Wow, it doesn't even check the date? Yuk!

there are some rudimentary checks in place; ben-from-the-future, could
not update this (with a future date)
(also, ben-from-WWII-era seemed to have some problems; but that’s
likely because computers were not so widely available then.. ;-))

> I am personally not much interested in spending cycles on fixing RPSL

> specs (and this wouldn't even be top of the list if I were).

yes; accurately populating the contents of the field, is key.

> Given that this field must contain "<rfc822 address> <yyyymmdd>",

> anyone

> have any clever ideas how to auto-populate it in a non-useless way?


> Perhaps recursively looking up an address via the authenticating

> mntner

> in one of the two ways:


> mntner > upd-to

> mntner > tech-c > e-mail


> Those both really only on the presence of mandatory attributes.

> Thoughts?

i started thinking about this because of IRR objects; iirc, from the
start, afrinic has *required* IRR objects to have a maintainer. of
course there is a long list of other objects that are also affected.

afrinic staff listening in, questions for you:
#1 - didn’t you add in auto-generated MNTers a while ago?
#2 - aren’t all new objects forced to have MNTers?
#3 - what, if any, objects don’t have MNTers nowadays?
#4 - how are other RIRs ensuring accuracy?


More information about the DBWG mailing list