Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the excellent reference.

With that, I think keeping the current title and using the term "private 
use" in most of instances is appropriate.  However, I'd would like to 
suggest the phrase "local or private use" be used in the first sentence 
of the abstract and introduction sections, keeping "private use" only 
elsewhere.  And, I think it would be great if you could add the 
reference below in the first sentence of the introduction as well.

Pulling something out of my other message, I think adding "by replacing 
Section 10 in its entirety." to the end of the abstract clarifies how 
this draft intends to updates RFC 1930.

Thanks

On 12/13/12 08:09 , Jon Mitchell wrote:
>
> Maybe I can assist with the definition... RFC1930 was writen a long time
> ago, but clearly in Section 10 it does say these are for private use.
> This is reconfirmed by RFC5226 definition of Private Use is what is
> being used in the draft, not a common language dictionary entry, here is
> the section text:
>
> 4.1. Well-Known IANA Policy Definitions
>
>
>     The following are some defined policies, some of which are in use
>     today.  These cover a range of typical policies that have been used
>     to date to describe the procedure for assigning new values in a
>     namespace.  It is not required that documents use these terms; the
>     actual requirement is that the instructions to IANA are clear and
>     unambiguous.  However, use of these terms is RECOMMENDED where
>     possible, since their meaning is widely understood.
>
>        Private Use - For private or local use only, with the type and
>              purpose defined by the local site.  No attempt is made to
>              prevent multiple sites from using the same value in
>              different (and incompatible) ways.  There is no need for
>              IANA to review such assignments (since IANA does not record
>              them) and assignments are not generally useful for broad
>              interoperability.  It is the responsibility of the sites
>              making use of the Private Use range to ensure that no
>              conflicts occur (within the intended scope of use).
>
>              Examples: Site-specific options in DHCP [DHCP-IANA], Fibre
>              Channel Port Type Registry [RFC4044], Exchange Types in the
>              IKEv2 header [RFC4306].
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 08:45:07PM -0600, David Farmer wrote:
>> On 12/12/12 20:28 , Jakob Heitz wrote:
>>> We all know what a private ASN is. "Local" is an overused word
>>> devoid of meaning. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>>>
>>> On , David Farmer <> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/12/12 15:07 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Jared Mauch <[e-mail]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 12, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>>> b) leak "private" space without explicit configurations to enable
>>>>>> said action.
>>>>>
>>>>> 'what is private' ?
>>>>
>>>> This got me thinking, why are we calling them "private" anyway?
>>
>> Ok, then you answer Chris' question.  That was my answer.
>>
>> I'll only add "private" seems an equally overused word and equally
>> devoid of meaning especially in this context.  And, you may not
>> think it is broke, but some people on the list seem to think it is
>> broken. So, maybe we should fix the brokenness, rather than
>> propagating the brokenness.
>>
>> --
>> ================================================
>> David Farmer               Email: [e-mail]
>> Office of Information Technology
>> University of Minnesota
>> 2218 University Ave SE     Phone: [phone]
>> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952
>> ================================================
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idr mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr


-- 
================================================
David Farmer               Email: [e-mail]
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE     Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================