On 2007-05-11 23:32, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
I've already indicated this in previous occasions, but may be not in ppml
...
We are proceeding in parallel, with the ID and the PDP at the same time.
Nothing in the PDP precludes doing so.
The RIRs don't depend on IETF at all, they can define global policies for
things that the IETF failed to complete if that's the case. IANA can be
instructed the same by the RIRs (which a global policy) than by the IETF
itself with an RFC.
Not quite. The RIRs have authority delegated to them by IANA, and IANA
operates under the terms of its MoU and SLA with the IETF. So the RIRs'
scope is to set and implement policy within their delegated authority,
which itself has to be within the terms of the IANA MoU and SLA.
In this case, I would check out section 4.3 of RFC 2860, especially
the clause (b) in the second paragraph. It's clear to me that centrally-
allocated ULAs are in IETF scope under that clause.
That being said, there's no conceivable problem with a draft being
developed by any set of people that want to do so, and the RIR people
are obviously strongly motivated to do so in this case. (Personally,
I see little need for it, since the existing pseudo-random ULAs
are good enough for any practical purpose, but that is a discussion
we can have in the IETF once there is a draft to discuss.)
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
