[address-policy-wg] 2014-02 New Policy Proposal (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-02 New Policy Proposal (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-02 New Policy Proposal (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jan Ingvoldstad
frettled at gmail.com
Mon Apr 21 21:14:36 CEST 2014
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote: > > These requirements are in my opinion out of touch with operational > reality; networks evolve and change over time, and given enough time, > pretty much all assignments made will end up being used in a different > way than what the original criteria was. The PI assignment request form > asked for an very detailed criteria, with a breakdown of each individual > subnet in the network, and a listing of all the equipment that would be > used, including the manufacturer name and model numbers. So if you in > the 1990s received an assignment that you had said was for a dozen brand > new Sun UltraServers, you better not have replaced those with modern x86 > hardware, or you have invalidated your assignment! :-O > > Some NCC staffers have told me that the way they've logically "solved" > this impossible requirement was to consider that whenever the > criteria/purpose changed, the original assignment was returned, and a > new one consisting of the same block was issued for the new purpose. > Then they could just "optimise out" the middle steps where the > assignment was removed and re-added. That approached worked (up until > Sep 2012 anyway), but I think it would be much better if the policy > didn't worry so much about the "original criteria", but rather focus on > whether or not the assignment conforms to the address policy in effect > at any given time. If it does, there is no reason to call it invalid. > > Well said. When specifying a purpose for a use, it is quite difficult to provide something that is generic enough to last for the lifetime of operations, rather than the lifetime of something else entirely. -- Jan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20140421/5be0935e/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-02 New Policy Proposal (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-02 New Policy Proposal (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]