[ppml] Policy Proposal 2002-3: Micro-Assignments forMultihome d Networks

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 02:11:17PM -0500, Bill Darte wrote:
> No one is trying to find trivial fault in order to argue against the policy.
> If the AC were clearly against 
> this policy, it would have simply been defeated.

I think the AC is in general for smaller allocations, please don't
interpret my frustration as a belief otherwise.  However I fully
understand the AC needs to find community support before acting,
and my impression is that is the problem with this issue.  Further,
it's not that the community is vocally against it, but rather that
very few people will stand up and be for it.

> Well you got pretty near contructive criticism here.... do you have a
> timeframe to suggest 
> that you think is meaningful or reasonable for judgement?

I think it would be at least two years before we know the impact
of such a proposal.  That gives enough time for people to be aware
it's available, incorporate that into their own plans, implment cut
overs, and return old space they are no longer using.

> It is not in the proposal.... it is in the process of assessing the
> viability of a proposal.

My apologies.  I misinterpreted earlier e-mail that the comments were
part of the policy itself, but I see now they were adjunct comments.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org