Re: RPSL announcement text

[Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>]

On Wed, 08 December 1999, Randy Bush wrote:
> the operational issue is not y2k this or that.  the issue for ops folk is
> that it is a change being made during what is anticipated to be the worst
> part of the the y2k window which could be made some other time.  this means
> that, if it is visible in any way, it can be confused with y2k symptoms thus
> adding to real operators' (as opposed to nanog posters') debugging problems
> at what may be a bad time.

I'm not a big fan of making changes that night, but this was announced
several months ago at IETF, NANOG and several mailing lists.  I didn't
hear anyone object to the schedule when it was announced.  I did hear
people complain about the RADB maintainer fee, so people were listening.

For better or worse, is it getting a bit late to go changing the schedule?
Is anyone still using the ripe-181 version of the IRR?