Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

Howdy, this draft did get renamed, but didn't get renamed properly for grow :( draft-grow-irr-routing-policy-considerations-00.txt could we re-spin the draft with a name more like: draft-ietf-grow-irr-routing-policy-considerations-00.txt that way it'll show up in the grow work items list. tha

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

howdy... a few days late, but in the end there was some support for adopting it, and at least no non-support for it. Could the authors spin a re-titled draft and hopefully they are incorporating comments/etc as well? thanks! -chris On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Gr

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

I have this draft in my toread list. Sorry about the delay. I have read and I support to adopt it as wg item. .as On 14/11/2012 20:35, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Grow Folks, > the authors of: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations > >

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > oops, is it too late to add a hum in favour of this ID from here? if not too late, I can add mine, apologies, been behind on list mails. -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

oops, is it too late to add a hum in favour of this ID from here? Nick On 14/11/2012 22:35, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Grow Folks, > the authors of: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations > > > > ha

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

Strongly support. IRR is a key issue for interdomain routing. Understanding the history is key for getting things right in the future. Andrew On Nov 14, 2012, at 2:35 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Grow Folks, > the authors of: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations > >

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

> Christopher Morrow > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 5:36 PM > To: grow-...@tools.ietf.org; grow-cha...@tools.ietf.org; grow@ietf.org > grow@ietf.org; draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy- > considerati...@tools.ietf.org > Subject: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routi

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

I think this is good work to adopt, and GROW is a good home for it. Russ Sent from my iPad On Nov 14, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Grow Folks, > the authors of: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations > >

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

Yes, adopt. But "s/efficacy/effectiveness/g" :-) Tony On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Danny McPherson wrote: > > Authors would definitely like to see this published, and GROW seems like a > reasonable home. > > Given that we need to fix the IRRs whether RPKI-enabled BGPSEC is fully > deploye

Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call: draft-mcpherson-irr-routing-policy-considerations (END: 11/28/2012)

Authors would definitely like to see this published, and GROW seems like a reasonable home. Given that we need to fix the IRRs whether RPKI-enabled BGPSEC is fully deployed or not, we should start considering what the issues are with it to inform improvements or recommend replacements. Commen