Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Mon, 09 February 2015 14:48 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E72581A044D for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 06:48:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qbvnr_IL9wbZ for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 06:48:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 619431A040C for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 06:48:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A7DBE7B; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:48:39 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yGHBdQGtAFwe; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:48:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [172.16.29.43] (rrcs-67-52-140-5.west.biz.rr.com [67.52.140.5]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B46FFBE75; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:48:32 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <54D8C89E.1080403@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:47:58 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
References: <F22D7C95-49EE-4BB9-9ED9-7475736A46C7@cooperw.in> <01870CB5-34E3-450A-910E-5A18D600B27B@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <01870CB5-34E3-450A-910E-5A18D600B27B@piuha.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/VEmR9VLmtT0Xx7fBQhZnXfeNvVo>
Cc: ianaplan@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <ianaplan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/>
List-Post: <mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:48:10 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



On 09/02/15 10:48, Jari Arkko wrote:
> FWIW, my read of the earlier discussion in IANAPLAN was that our
> opinion was “not required” rather than that we’d oppose it. If that
> is right, then the answer is perhaps that we’d be fine with that.
> Do I read that right, and what do others think?

I agree. I think that was very clear from the mailing list
discussion.

In response to the question asked though I think we should (if
this mail thread is not eventually a sufficient answer) make
sure we say that we see no conflict between the RIR position
and ours. They differ a little, but not much, and without any
incompatibility at all.

I think we need to explicitly say that because a simple "yes"
answer to the question asked would be ambiguous as to whether
or not we do or do not see a conflict, and I can imagine that
some people might argue that such an answer requires another
iteration of q&a, or to claim there's a whole bunch more work
needed when it's not, either of which would be a pity.

S.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU2MieAAoJEC88hzaAX42i+cUH/i+/ufzXlFt5o+kWv1hVMD/2
UBDad0eMuceNi3t0+K8G/efbfpGcbKYS7pqNVGXJ5Q9AQDQo3rt8PzpYyg1cWW9I
lY1wGaDsZCDB7geSdLRj8ZfRirTlTn1cbqhdxb5VbAVraWp8CO4Y+O0OpqiVl8Qj
JNIB4m97OXrrK57IBbLJQL4gmcHerYM5KiqR6OHjulGCeGdj/eXsv9UPeCu5gz8C
zau0A+wr9Mwnm4gifzMh366SNrCTyi8ThMEVH7ov2G66h+du22+JuQSWpRfz7KBR
G1M1sf3BvGQyxNOHwG2T+zFzND3jz2zppEXZ1R4xx3lC4vgShDhDoikO9UueSiw=
=6jtJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----