About RIPE | Contact  | Search | Sitemap    
Homepage RIPE  
RIPE Community Mail Archives
search  
     
RIPE Navigation Ends
About RIPE Maillists
Maillists Archive
Global Lists
Non Active Lists
RIPE NCC Navigation Ends
Next Section

Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Can the RIRs bypass the IETF and do their own thing?

  • To: Gert Doering gert@localhost
  • From: Brian E Carpenter brc@localhost
  • Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 15:18:29 +0200
  • Cc: Shane Kerr shane@localhost, "address-policy-wg@localhost" address-policy-wg@localhost
  • Organization: IBM

I fully agree with Gert! I'm looking forward to a draft to discuss
on its technical merits.

    Brian

On 2007-05-14 23:31, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 04:08:19PM +0200, Shane Kerr wrote:
If the RIRs decide to allocate numbers from dead:beef::/32 based on
lunar tides, then the IETF and IANA and ICANN can complain about it
all day long, but it's not their decision to make. Of course they can
participate in the policy making process like everyone else. :)

Well, technically you are correct - but given the way "The Internet"
works, it works better if there is agreement on where the numbers come
from, and how they are distributed in a way that makes them unique.

So the RIRs *do* try to cooperate with ICANN/IANA and the IETF :-)

And please let's *not* use the RIPE APWG mailinglist for a fundamental debate on whether the RIR model is all broken, the IETF is too slow to be useful, or whatever gripes you have - we need to focus the discussions
somewhat, otherwise too many people will just stop working with us.

[If you really feel that the RIPE model is all broken, by all means say so -- but please open a new mail thread for it, instead of shanghaiing a specific policy proposal discussion]

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair




 

Next Section
     About RIPE | Site Map | LIR Portal | About the RIPE NCC | Contact | Copyright Statement
RIPE.NET Homepage LIR Portal RIPE Community