Antonio_Blasco Bonito writes :
that the authoritative registry for a certain object is in practice the registry where the object's maintainer is registered. I think it should be expressed more clearly. Something like: [...] When a user sends an update to a registry, that registry will forward it to the registry which is authoritative for the object (i.e. the registry specified in the object's maintainer entry). [...]
Yes, this is more clear ...
and a proposal:
since the objects returned upon request by certain registry are actually data received by neighbor registries through some "distribution path" why not recycling the source attribute (or invent a new one) to keep track of that path? I'm prettu sure that this information may prove useful.
I agree, we should keep this information, but we could better use another name then 'source' to avoid confusion. David Kessens RIPE NCC -----