On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 11:32:49PM +0200, Andre Koopal wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 10:05:34PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 07:51:31PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
As I don't see any more comments on this, have we already reached consensus? Hiding more-specific objects by default is such a major change that I do not think it can be deployed after a discussion among just three or four people.
Nobody wants to hide more-specifics.
The goal is to show the inetnum: object (as before) and, in addition to that, the most-specific available irt: object. *In the default response*.
So if the inetnum: has its own mnt-irt: then show it, but if there is only one for the encompassing /16 (or whatever), then show the "parent" irt: - otherweise irt: is pretty useless.
That is exactly what I mean.
And I don't see this as a discussion between 3 or 4 people, everybody can read this and participate. So the rest either doesn't care or agrees :-)
And it is going now as I feared it. Because most seem to either agree or don't care there is hardly any discussion and as a result notting seems to be happening. Wilfried: how can I make this an official proposal? Should I use the new policy proposal process? Regards, Andre Koopal MCI