[rpd] Proposal: Clarification on temporary resource usage

Mon Apr 15 15:53:50 UTC 2019

Somehow, I agree with Andrew.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas/

is already in the Editor Queue, so it is a matter of a few days or weeks that it will have an RFC number.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment/

Is now in IETF v6ops Working Group Last Call, since last week. ***Nobody**** said this is good or bad (even if it is a Working Group document and that means that previously the WG adopted it) … same problem as we have here with policy proposals. It may even happen that because nobody goes to the v6ops mailing list to say “it is a good document” or “I’m missing this or that” or “correct this because it is wrong”, the document just dies. Unfortunate, but is the bad thing of “consensus” that not everybody speaks up, even if they may agree with something.

So, taking the opportunity … if you believe that https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment/

Provides a good guidance for deploying NAT64/464XLAT, please, register at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment/, and say that you support that document.

Here is the relevant email:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/h-c-v936g56uWcaB3dndFnouPt8

Regards,

Jordi

El 15/4/19 17:40, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> escribió:

Willy,

Heh – at the speed the IETF works – if you wait for formal RFC’s these days – you’ll be waiting a hell of a long time.

TACACS – which has been around for 20+ years – is a draft

Segment routing – which is being more and more used – is a draft

Segment routing BGP extensions – is a draft 

It’s a long long list of very much production technologies 

The draft tag – doesn’t mean much these days

Andrew

From: Willy Manga <mangawilly at gmail.com> 
Sent: Sunday, 14 April 2019 23:51
To: rpd at afrinic.net
Subject: Re: [rpd] Proposal: Clarification on temporary resource usage

Hi Jordi,

On 21/12/2018 18:50, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
> [...]
> You may want to add the following references (the first one will become, hopefully soon, an RFC):
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas/
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment/

I'd love to include them but right now they are still in the draft
section. It is better to mention documents elected as RFC in the CPM in
my humble opinion.

If they get approval before the end of the discussion on this proposal,
they will surely be included.

-- 
Willy Manga
@ongolaboy
https://ongola.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________ RPD mailing list RPD at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd 

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190415/9d043fc0/attachment-0001.html>