j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
good mornin' thomas,
my memory of the discussion at the meeting was o there is precedent for apnic doing this
What precendent, other than the IPv6 prefix?
the perception seemed to be that it worked.
This sort of global reservation is best made by IANA (at the request of someone). We have lots of examples/precedent for that. The IETF is the logical place for the request to come from.
that last is not completely clear. it's at the border between ops/rirs and tech/ietf.
o for it to have global/formal effect, there probably should be an rfc directing the iana
If APNIC makes the reservation, IANA can only record what APNIC has done after the fact.
as it did with the v6 documentation prefix. this is perceived as having worked.
o but an apnic allocation would do in the long meantime
I disagree about the "long" part. The IETF can do this quickly too.
( i will keep my mouth shut. i will keep my mouth shut. ... :)
Also, it wouldn't be a "meantime". Once APNIC makes the reservation, it cannot be revoked, since the vendor might have already put bit into documentation.
is there a problem with this? is it a bug or a feature?
so we have the volunteer. folk did look at him with expectation.
so what is actually broken here? ietf's tosies being stepped on?