Re: [sig-policy] prop-101 - Status check
Since its release in March, I believe that I've seen clear statements on
this list of support for the current draft (v4) of proposal 101 from:
- Dean Pemberton
- Mark Foster
- Randy Whitney
- Aftab Siddiqui
(There have been others who supported previous versions, and others I
feel have implied but not directly stated support - I have not wanted to
make assumptions of support for the current draft without clear
statements. I apologise to anyone that I've missed or accidentally
misrepresented; please correct my statements if I have.)
I am only aware of Terence Zhang as actively not supporting the current
draft, and - as has been discussed on the list - I believe he supports
the overall proposal concept but he is concerned that only a "reasonable
technical justification" is proposed, rather than more specific
criteria, on the basis that it may lead to overly generous
interpretations which could lead to massive numbers of portable
allocations which could greatly increase the global routing table size.
I have suggested alterations to the draft to make the justification
criteria specific, which I believe Terence supports (perhaps with some
question over also including multihoming), but others on the list have
so far not done so (and there have been two indications of preference to
leave it as "reasonable technical justification").
I suggest that more clear feedback is required to be able to truly
indicate the community feeling; would anyone else be prepared to either
declare their support for the draft as it stands, or to suggest further
changes (including support for the specific criteria that Terence is
seeking)?
With many thanks,
David Woodgate