[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [sig-policy] last call: prop-061: Autonomous System Numbers (ASN) for documentation purposes
good mornin' thomas,
>> my memory of the discussion at the meeting was
>> o there is precedent for apnic doing this
> What precendent, other than the IPv6 prefix?
that's it.
the perception seemed to be that it worked.
> This sort of global reservation is best made by IANA (at the request
> of someone). We have lots of examples/precedent for that. The IETF is
> the logical place for the request to come from.
that last is not completely clear. it's at the border between ops/rirs
and tech/ietf.
>> o for it to have global/formal effect, there probably should be an rfc
>> directing the iana
> If APNIC makes the reservation, IANA can only record what APNIC has
> done after the fact.
as it did with the v6 documentation prefix. this is perceived as having
worked.
>> o but an apnic allocation would do in the long meantime
> I disagree about the "long" part. The IETF can do this quickly too.
( i will keep my mouth shut. i will keep my mouth shut. ... :)
> Also, it wouldn't be a "meantime". Once APNIC makes the reservation,
> it cannot be revoked, since the vendor might have already put bit into
> documentation.
is there a problem with this? is it a bug or a feature?
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-huston-as-documentation-reservation-00
so we have the volunteer. folk did look at him with expectation.
so what is actually broken here? ietf's tosies being stepped on?
randy
