Hi denis,

I have to say that I don't agree with you at all here.
The current state of this is just the same as the org-name attribute which is user editable in organisations without co-maintained resources.
It doesn't make sense to me to somehow give this country attribute more weight than the org-name attribute.
It also doesn't make sense to me to have different country code attributes for orgs with co-maintained resources compared to those without co-maintained resources.

If you think this is a problem I would say that the better solution here is to have a different org-type for organizations that have co-maintained resources.
That way we could communicate that some attributes are verified/maintained by the RIPE NCC for orgs with co-maintained resources.

Personally, I don't see how having country codes that are unverified for orgs without co-maintained resources is a real issue, but if people think that the mixing of verified and unverified data is an issue then I would propose the org-type solution.

-Cynthia

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 2:03 PM denis walker via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Colleagues

We have a number of outstanding issues from RIPE 85 so let's start
with NWI-10. Ed said in his update,
"Country code is now editable in organisations without co-maintained resources"
I think this is a really bad idea.

The country codes entered into ORGANISATION objects by the RIPE NCC
are well defined, verified and maintained by the RIPE NCC. If we allow
users to edit this field in other ORGANISATION objects, the values
they enter will be undefined, unverified and meaningless. Just like
the country code in resource objects. I don't think we should allow
more meaningless data to be added to the RIPE Database. Even worse, we
are mixing well defined data with meaningless data in the same
attribute in the same object. This will end up with some people
trusting all of this data and some people not trusting any of
it...confusion.

I suggest we don't allow users to enter any data into this attribute
and remove any data that may have already been entered. If there is a
need for resource holders to enter a country code in ORGANISATION
objects set up for end users, then let's define a specific attribute
for that with a well defined meaning. Your thoughts are welcome...

cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/db-wg