[ppml] Proposed Policy: eGLOP Multicast Address Assignments- not accepted by AC as formal policy proposal

[Azinger, Marla]

Andrew- at the risk of saying ditto  I do to the following statement you made:

"administration of multicast space is something new for the RIRs and we need to consider this before jumping in.  This policy proposal, as written, is probably not complete enough as written and needs further work (specific allocation criteria, etc).  The other issue that don't know if it has been considered with is the issue of ensuring uniqueness between RIRs .  Do we expect IANA to chop up the eGLOP space and give a chunk to each RIR?"

But I dont interpret this document to specifically ask RIR's to do this as you do.  At best it eludes to it, and the above clip of your prior statement points out all the open ended issues.  

Cheers!
Marla Azinger
Frontier Communications

-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
Andrew Dul
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 10:30 AM
To: Marshall Eubanks; PPML PPML
Subject: Re: [ppml] Proposed Policy: eGLOP Multicast Address
Assignments- not accepted by AC as formal policy proposal


>  -------Original Message-------
>  From: Marshall Eubanks <tme at multicasttech.com>
>  Subject: Re: [ppml] Proposed Policy: eGLOP Multicast Address Assignments -	not accepted by AC as formal policy proposal
>  Sent: 02 Mar '07 10:19
>  
>  Hello;
>  
>  On Mar 2, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Member Services wrote:
>  
>  > On 1 March 2007 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) concluded its review of
>  > the proposed policy 'eGLOP Multicast Address Assignments' and did not
>  > accept it as a formal policy proposal.
>  >
>  > Citing RFC 2050, the AC concluded that ARIN was not empowered to
>  > administer multicast address space.
>  
>  I must admit that I do not understand this reasoning, and intend to  
>  petition / appeal this.
>  
>  RFC 2050 / BCP 12 merely says WRT multicast that
>  
>  This document does not describe private Internet address space and
>       multicast address space.

I would also tend to agree.

To me, RFC 3180 specifically asks the RIRs to administer this space.

However, I also realize administration of multicast space is something new for the RIRs and we need to consider this before jumping in.  This policy proposal, as written, is probably not complete enough as written and needs further work (specific allocation criteria, etc).  The other issue that don't know if it has been considered with is the issue of ensuring uniqueness between RIRs .  Do we expect IANA to chop up the eGLOP space and give a chunk to each RIR?  

Andrew



_______________________________________________
PPML mailing list
PPML at arin.net
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml