[address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
John Curran
jcurran at arin.net
Tue May 29 20:36:25 CEST 2012
On May 29, 2012, at 2:10 PM, David Conrad wrote: > On May 29, 2012, at 8:42 AM, John Curran wrote: >> It is possible that the goals in RFC 2050 are worth reevaluating (in light of >> IPv4 runout, the nature of IPv6, etc.) but the community has yet to perform >> that task and so it should not be surprising in the meantime that some policy >> discussions in the regions may take into consideration more than simply the >> single goal of ensuring uniqueness. > > I was, of course, speaking of the historical RIRs that focused on being registries. As I stated, policies change. David - I believe that both presently and historically the RIR communities have considered the goals of "conservation" and "routability" in addition to uniqueness. RFC 2050 is, after all, a historic document. With regards to "policies change", if you believe there should be a new registry model where registries consist solely of providing uniqueness and address block contact information, that does indeed appear to be a change in policy and I'd suggest submitting to the appropriate fora. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]