[arin-ppml] Fwd: [OPSAWG] end of WGLC on transition space
bensons at queuefull.net
Wed Aug 17 10:15:27 EDT 2011
Sorry for the forwarded message, but I thought this might be of interest to PPML.
The IETF Ops Area Working Group has concluded that there is consensus around reserving an IPv4 /10 prefix for Shared Transition Space. This specific message (below) is in reference to http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-03 which, in turn, points to http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bdgks-arin-shared-transition-space-01 as an applicability statement.
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob at harvard.edu>
> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 07:49:46 -0400 (EDT)
> To: <opsawg at ietf.org>
> Subject: [OPSAWG] end of WGLC on transition space
> this concludes the opsawg WGLC on shared transition space
> There were 45 messages from 22 people on the opsawg mailing list in
> response to the WGLC. Assuming I counted correctly, four of the
> posters were opposed to the proposal, 17 in favor and one said he was
> not in favor or opposed.
> Based on the mailing list discussion I would conclude that there is
> consensus in support of the proposal.
> In addition the proposal was discussed during the opsawg session in
> Quebec City. Seventy nine people signed opsawg blue sheets for that
> session and I expect that a number of people present for the
> discussion did not sign since the room was standing room only and the
> blue sheets did not get to everyone and a number of people left after
> the shared transition space discussion.
> Most people in room raised a hand when asked if the supported goal of
> ID, I did not see any that disagreed but a few people spoke against
> the proposal so I may have missed a few hands.
> from RFC 2418
> In the case where a consensus which has been reached during a face-
> to-face meeting is being verified on a mailing list the people who
> were in the meeting and expressed agreement must be taken into
> account. If there were 100 people in a meeting and only a few people
> on the mailing list disagree with the consensus of the meeting then
> the consensus should be seen as being verified. Note that enough
> time should be given to the verification process for the mailing list
> readers to understand and consider any objections that may be raised
> on the list. The normal two week last-call period should be
> sufficient for this.
> Thus, based on the combination of the very strong support shown in
> the face-to-face meeting and the strong support in response to the
> WGLC, I conclude that the WG has reached consensus in support of the
> I will now forward a request to the ADs that the ID be published
> using the AD sponsored procedure.
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG at ietf.org
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
More information about the ARIN-PPML