[PDB Tech] allow empty IP field or not?

[Job Snijders]

Perhaps a different way of phrasing the question:

When you indicate you are a participant of an IXP, should entering an IP address be optional?

Kind regards,

Job

On 25 Dec 2016, 12:39 +0100, Job Snijders <job at instituut.net>, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Sometimes people want to disclose their presence at an Internet
> Exchange, but don't want to disclose their IP address.
>
> Should PeeringDB allow the IPv4 and IPv6 field to be either of the
> following?
>
> "a valid globally unique IP address"
> "" (empty)
>
> Or should PDB only accept valid globally unique IP addresses as value
> for the IP Field?
>
> It appears we've gone back and forth between allowing empty and not
> allowing empty as is visible here: https://www.peeringdb.com/ix/1138
> (currently empty is not allowed).
>
> An argument against 'empty' is that from an automation perspective the
> 'empty' value is quite useless.
>
> Based on the outcome of this discussion I'd like to either clean up the
> database, or popularise the use of the 'empty ip field' where
> applicable.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.peeringdb.com/pipermail/pdb-tech/attachments/20161225/0afa56df/attachment.html>