Re: Last Call: <draft-bonica-special-purpose-03.txt> (Special-Purpose Address Registries) to Best Current Practice

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Thu, 29 November 2012 23:04 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7748121F8AC9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:04:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.099, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E-06jobAKa6d for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:04:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD9121F8ABB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:04:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1TeDA1-000Cg3-0W; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 23:04:49 +0000
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 08:04:47 +0900
Message-ID: <m21ufc2epc.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-bonica-special-purpose-03.txt> (Special-Purpose Address Registries) to Best Current Practice
In-Reply-To: <CDE0AD71-206A-4447-8C9D-09ADF616A00E@apnic.net>
References: <20121129205534.8983.43593.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7C5BEF8A-70E1-4E96-BC5C-7D2D43E09A58@apnic.net> <m24nk82g95.wl%randy@psg.com> <CDE0AD71-206A-4447-8C9D-09ADF616A00E@apnic.net>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 23:04:51 -0000

> Yes, it is possible to add an attribute to a common registry.
> 
> On the other hand it is possible to realign what entries go in which
> registry according to:
> 
> - "reservations" to be in the "main" registry, using a working
>   definition of a "reservation" as something that all implementations
>   of the protocol have to honour.
> 
> - all other IANA special purpose address assignments to be placed in
>   this special purpose registry (including, for example RFC1918 space,
>   6to4 relays, etc), and the RFC to document the process of special
>   purpose assignment.

an N-ary attribute or N lists, semantically about the same, syntax seems
a matter of taste.  i agree with the distinction, and am happy with
either syntax.

randy