Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-09 New Policy Proposal (ASPLAIN Format for the Registration of 4-byte ASNs)

["Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" Woeber@localhost]

[ restricting my reply to the ap-wg list ]

Thomas,

Thomas Narten wrote:

>>We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to
>>address-policy-wg@localhost before 17 November 2008.
> 
> 
> I am opposed to this proposal because it seems completely
> inappropriate to use a PDP for something this straightforward and
> low-level.

the reason for having to use the PDP is the fact that registration
format "ASDOT" is explicitely prescribed in the AS# distribution-
policy doc. This was a conscious (but maybe unwise) decision, taken
at a time when there was no (standards) rfc available.

This has already been explained somewhere on the list(s) iirc.

> Also, this issue goes beyond RIPE and is about development of an
> industry standard. It is not a RIPE-specific issue. There are more
> appropriate other fora for developing industry standards. RIPE (and
> indeed all RIRs) should defer to other industry bodies for development
> of technical standards.
> 
> Note that the IETF is currently finalizing the document
> draft-ietf-idr-as-representation-01.txt already. Indeed, the IESG will
> be formally considering it this week, so with a little bit of luck, it
> will be an RFC in a month.
> 
> At that point, it would be fine for RIPE to adopt that standard, but I
> would hope that it could do so without requiring a PDP. (Does RIPE
> generally need a PDP before it is allowed to start using an IETF
> standards?)

I presume in general the answer would be NO to your (question). But
please stop bashing RIPE for respecting its own internal procedures.

> Let's keep things simple please!

Indeed, but I guess you would not recommend to "simply" change a
formally adopted policy document, would you? This could be seen as
a nasty precedent...

> PS, if there are any objections to
> draft-ietf-idr-as-representation-01.txt becoming the standard for ASN
> representation, make your opinions known to the IETF immediately!
> 
> Thomas

Wilfried.