bicknell at ufp.org
Thu Oct 23 21:28:29 EDT 2003
In a message written on Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 07:16:57PM -0400, Lee Howard wrote:
> The concern in Wednesday's policy BOF, as I heard it, was not that
> the terms are poorly defined, but that even knowing the definitions
> it's easy to confuse which term applies to which definition, and maybe
> ther distinction isn't necessary after all.
That is my concern. People use allocation and assignment everyday,
and in many contexts (outside of ARIN) those two words are treated
as synonyms. Further, they are two words that are easily interchanged
(similar length and sound). It's the same problem that prevents
people from using "0" and "O" or "I" and "1" on license plates
together, it's not that they are not different, or that they are
not well defined, just easily confused.
As an aside, since they are synonyms I'm sure translation of ARIN
policy into other languages creates much more confusion. Perhaps
those from other RIR's (or the french speaking from Canada) could
comment on how much of a problem this causes in automated or human
translation of the documents.
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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML