[ppml] [address-policy-wg] Those pesky ULAs again
Iljitsch van Beijnum iljitsch at muada.com
Wed May 30 00:06:48 CEST 2007
On 29-mei-2007, at 23:52, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > That's broken. As it has been stated in previous messages some days > ago, RIR > communities can do whatever they want, especially if IETF fails. > I'm doing > IETF work, but it is clear that some times, for whatever reasons is > too > slow, or even fails. This community has the right to bypass that if > required. The IETF is far from perfect, but I'm not quite convinced that the RIRs stepping in when the IETF doesn't produce the desired results is going to work well. > And one more demonstration that this is broken: All the RIRs did 4- > byte-ASN > policies when no RFCs where available. There had been a draft for more than 5 years, the reason that there was no RFC was a process particularity (can't publish a routing RFC without there being interoperable implementations), not lack of consensus on any technical issue. > So yes, I will much prefer to have an RFC, and this is the way we > are going, What exactly is the way we are going?