Hi Sasha & James, During RIPE93 meeting I carefully watched the presentation that was delivered during the DB-WG session and later in the day I had conversations both with James and Ed Shryane about it. I fully support the ideas (scoped members & excluded members) and I strongly believe we are missing those features in daily operations. In fact, they should have been developed in the earlier days of IRR system. Therefore, I would like to ask the DB-WG chairs to create the required NWI to track development on those two. Thank you again for putting your energy on that and looking forward to see progress happening there. Kind Regards Stavros From: Sasha Romijn via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> Date: Monday, 2 November 2026 at 13:35 To: db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> Subject: [db-wg] registry scoped members and excl-members NWI proposal Hello db-wg, James and I have recently presented draft-ietf-grow-rpsl-registry-scoped-members and draft-bensley-rpsl-exclude-members in the RIPE92 and RIPE93 sessions. We just published new versions of these drafts. Feedback so far has been positive, and while details will still develop, we'd like to suggest an NWI for the RIPE Database to implement these two drafts. As RIPE Database has no set resolver/expansion, this concerns adding two new fields along with validation and generation rules. We are still working on some issues around uniqueness across registries, and the practicalities of editing objects with auto-generated content. You can see our work on this in the respective GitHub repositories, and we hope to settle that soon. Once we write implementations, new issues will probably surface, and there are still other rough edges in the text. However, we feel the core is solid. Draft Problem Statement: The as-set and route-set objects are used in the IRR for automatic filter generation. However, resolving the members of these sets has insufficient flexibility, causing operational difficulties. Particularly, references between sets can be ambiguous in the IRR, and some indirectly referred set objects resolve to undesirably large prefix lists, with insufficient controls available for the operator. Draft Solution Definition: Implement the drafts draft-ietf-grow-rpsl-registry-scoped-members and draft-bensley-rpsl-exclude-members in the RIPE Database. As the RIPE Database does not resolve sets, the scope is to add new fields to as-set and route-set, with a number of new validation and generation rules. These drafts are still in development, so details may still change. We welcome your input and support on making this an NWI. If you have comments relating more to the drafts than RIPE Database implementation, they might fit better on the IETF GROW wg list: https://mailman3.ietf.org/mailman3/lists/grow@ietf.org/ References: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-rpsl-registry-scoped-member... https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bensley-rpsl-exclude-members/ https://github.com/mxsasha/rpsl-registry-scoped-members https://github.com/jwbensley/rpsl-exclude-members Sasha ----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/