Hi Pim,

| Hmm, this is nice, but not really necessary, because with the -c flag in | the whois-query you should get tho the allocated /40 anyway. | | i.e. your change should increase the # of objects, bur not the Footprint | of the IRT [ ... ] , should I revert that software change and NOT set mnt-irt in the more specifics, or should I leave it as is. Opinions ?

setting it to the _same_ pointer is superfluous or just duplication of information. Unless you want to do it for a particular purpose (like to be explicit), it is a bad idea - having duplicate info in a dataset leaves you with the risk of missing one copy when an update is necessary. BUT - what you can do with this mechanism is to point to a _different_ irt object. Either for a subset of your own infrastructure (like a regional PoP), or as a 1st level contact for your downstreams. And those downstreams can update the contact info without having to bother you in your role as the _address_ bookkeeping :-) Wilfried.