[PDB Tech] allow empty IP field or not?

[Eric Loos]

So let’s close the discussion? :-) Empty field not allowed?

Furthermore, people that just blindly configure based on an address popping up in peeringdb should at least have consulted with their peer, I hope. What we then need is not a reference database which is what PDB is today, but a workflow component which would allow both peers to acknowledge that both are happy to peer on certain IXP’s between certain IP pairs.
> On 28 Dec 2016, at 17:38, Matt Griswold <grizz at 20c.com> wrote:
> 
> * Kristian Larsson <kristian at spritelink.net> [161228 15:24 +0100]:
>>> Summarizing the discussion so far I have the impression that
>>> 
>>> * IP address must be set (IPv4 OR IPv6)
>>> 
>>> * YAF for indicating "will show up soon" would be great as well  
>> 
>> I don't know about this. Does it really matter? I know people like to 
>> mark their intended / future presence on an IX but there are lots of 
>> habits that people have for no apparent reason.
> 
> Agree completely, am in favor of IP being required and eventually
> validated to be in a prefix listed by the IX.
> _______________________________________________
> Pdb-tech mailing list
> Pdb-tech at lists.peeringdb.com
> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech