[DBWG] more formalised change process?

Frank Habicht geier at geier.ne.tz
Tue Jul 28 12:51:45 UTC 2020

Hi all,

I'd like to split off Nishal's final question below into a separate
thread. Subject is changed, but still a response to his email [1].

Regarding the question about a formal way to submit requests:

In my understanding we don't have a formal way - yet. And we (the group)
have the power to give us one.
It would likely add credibility and certainty/predictability to the
group and the process. On the other hand it _could_ draw out some
changes to take longer. I also think this is not 0 and 1 - middle ground
can be there.
Lastly, we'd need not only consensus about whether we want to formalise
more, but also folk volunteering to draft something.


if there are strong opinions how this should be different, one can
probably educate me.

On 28/07/2020 14:38, Nishal Goburdhan wrote:

> hi,


> per the subject line, i think that this is something that afrinic’s db

> could auto-append.


> this basically means that the field:

> “changed:  <user at domain> <date>”


> would no longer need to be filled out by the requestor, and afrinic

> would auto-populate this, based on :

> # mail headers,

> # datetime,

> and other relevant bits that can be discussed further here.  i can’t see

> this breaking anything, but welcome additional discussion.


> i’m also not aware of a formal way to request these sorts of changes,

> so, if there actually *is* one, other than suggestions posted here,

> please educate me.


> —n.


> _______________________________________________

> DBWG mailing list

> DBWG at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/dbwg

More information about the DBWG mailing list