[PDB Data Ownership-TF] conditions for being listed in a facility

[Arnold Nipper]

On 09.01.2020 16:45, Chris Caputo wrote:
> On 07.01.2020 22:58, Chris Caputo wrote:
>> - ixlan: Join of ix and netixlan, listing networks at IXP
>>   - Ex: https://www.peeringdb.com/api/ixlan/13
> 
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, Arnold Nipper wrote:
>> Actually, grandparent as the parent of ixpfx is ixlan. Let's see what PC
>> comes up, once we remove ixlan.
> 
> I noticed in the upcoming release notes:
> 
>   - * Important note - as part of this release we'll begin dropping 
>       support for IX LANs. No impact is expected in this release but the 
>       Admin Committee may be reaching out to various IX owners to remodel 
>       their IX objects.  Details of this change are in github:  
>       https://github.com/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/21
> 
> I compared production:
> 
>   https://www.peeringdb.com/api/ixlan/13
> 
> and beta (since it has the above change in place now):
> 
>   https://beta.peeringdb.com/api/ixlan/13
> 
> and the results are very similar.
> 

Actually the results should be identical. However, up to now and ix may
have unlimited numbers of ixlans. That will change with the next release
where each ix exactly has one ixlan. Even with exactly the same id (i.e.
ix_id == ixlan_id). That's the reason we will be able to drop ixlan in
V3 completely.

> Thus it appears the REST API "ixlan" result is very different than the 
> database table "ixlan".  Just something to keep in mind as we discuss 
> things.
> 

Is the database table layout public somewhere? And is it relevant? We
are always only talking about API objects so far.



Cheers
Arnold
-- 
Arnold Nipper
email: arnold at peeringdb.com
mobile: +49 172 2650958

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.peeringdb.com/pipermail/dataownership-tf/attachments/20200109/830a53ae/attachment.sig>