[address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks

On 24.02 23:02, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
> On 24.02 19:41, Jon Lawrence wrote:
> > Whilst a proactive approach is a good idea, is it really the RIR's position to 
> > do this ? As has been said previously, it's not the RIR's responsibility to 
> > ensure routability of IP addtresses this must lie with the various ISP's.
> 
> I note that explicitly in my draft. If there are many ISPs opposed to the RIRs
> doing this we will gladly not do it and point those experiencing connectivity
> problems because of false positive matches on out-dated bogon filters to the fact
> that our community does not want us to do anything about it pro-actively. ;-(

Jon, 

on re-reading this message this morning I realise that its tone was a
bit inappropriate.  My only excuse is the serious abuse I have been
exposed to in private messages since I posted this draft.  It looks like
a lot of people take me personally responsible for out-dated bogon
filters I have no responsibility for whatsoever. Once again, apologies
for the tone of voice. 

The message remains: If you want the RIRs to do the pro-active testing
and notofocation that I propose you will have to make your voice heared
to them, just as you have to make your voice heared if you believe they
should not do this.

Regards

Daniel