[ppml] [address-policy-wg] Those pesky ULAs again

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

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?