> ARIN & NANOG are nothing more than heat lately (all hot air?). As I > suggested at NANOG this week, the right thing to do is for the WG to define > the space, and turn it over to IANA to manage.
the internet's addressing system uses a combination of top-down architectural guideance (from IAB and IESG and the WGs) and bottom-up operational policy guideance (from the RIRs). the fact that this proposal is garnering a lot of heat from the bottom-up side of the process ought to be a strong hint that the top-down side ought to listen carefully and use great caution. > Beyond that it was all policy anyway, so the fact that it is defined makes > no difference if policy chooses to ignore it. Not defining it leaves policy > with no alternative but to succumb to those that want nothing more than to > exercise power through control of the address space. > > I say wrap it up and ship it. if that's what we're doing, then, i say kill it. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
