this was a major war some time back. it might be fun to do it sgain.
randy
___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 22:08, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 08:55:47PM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
> > If people agree that a doc discouraging the use of asdot should exist,
> > please let me know.
>
> Nick might remember where the push came from that made "RIPE" (the
> community,
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 08:55:47PM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
> If people agree that a doc discouraging the use of asdot should exist,
> please let me know.
Nick might remember where the push came from that made "RIPE" (the
community, the NCC, the RIPE DB) change from ASDOT to ASPLAIN.
It
Job Snijders wrote on 06/08/2018 20:35:
I'm not the biggest fan of that philosophy. Especially because in the
milions of objecst that exist in the combined IRR databases, it appears
only four of them have something with ASDOT in the wrong place.
right, you didn't mention that the 4 affected
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 20:53, Christopher Morrow <
christopher.mor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:36 AM Job Snijders wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:26:41PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>> > > On Aug 6, 2018, at 8:20 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Job Snijders
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:36 AM Job Snijders wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:26:41PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> > > On Aug 6, 2018, at 8:20 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> > >
> > > Job Snijders wrote on 06/08/2018 14:22>
> > >> RFC 5396 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5396 described the
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:26:41PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> > On Aug 6, 2018, at 8:20 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> >
> > Job Snijders wrote on 06/08/2018 14:22>
> >> RFC 5396 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5396 described the "asdot+"
> >> and "asdot" representation formats for AS numbers. I'd
> On Aug 6, 2018, at 8:20 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> Job Snijders wrote on 06/08/2018 14:22> RFC 5396
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5396 described the "asdot+" and
>> "asdot" representation formats for AS numbers.
>> I'd personally prefer a single canonical way to represent ASNs
>>
Job Snijders wrote on 06/08/2018 14:22> RFC 5396
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5396 described the "asdot+" and
"asdot" representation formats for AS numbers.
I'd personally prefer a single canonical way to represent ASNs
(asplain), and while RFC 5396 proposes the adoption of a decimal value
Dear WG,
RFC 5396 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5396 described the "asdot+" and
"asdot" representation formats for AS numbers.
I'd personally prefer a single canonical way to represent ASNs
(asplain), and while RFC 5396 proposes the adoption of a decimal value
notation 'asplain', I don't think
10 matches
Mail list logo
