<div dir="ltr">Hi Nishal <div><br></div><div><div>By limited resources we mean human, material and financial resources.</div><div>Section 13.2 says : The reviews cover all allocated/Assigned resources, but priority goes to IPv4 and ASN mappable to two-octet ASNs".</div><div>Further proof is the of IPv6-only member category in the random class. (IPv6 is far from being a limited resource).</div><div><br></div><div> But it does not really matter as long as we all agree on the new text which take all members in the random class</div><div><br></div><div>Regards </div><div><br></div><div>Arnaud</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2017-11-27 9:10 GMT+00:00 Nishal Goburdhan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nishal@controlfreak.co.za" target="_blank">nishal@controlfreak.co.za</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 23 Nov 2017, at 20:17, Arnaud AMELINA wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Nishal,<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
hi,<span class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
We acknowledged that this has been raised and discussed. Main concerns<br>
being addressed were issues of limited resources.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
ok. i can see how your intent would have not been immediately obvious, since you seem to have initially listed as discrete categories “EU-ASN”, and, well, there isn’t a shortage of ASNs for general use. or, “IPv6 Large users” because, again, there isn’t really an ipv6 shortage. well, not until the Borg invade, anyway [1]. so “limited resources” were certainly not the first words in my mind.<br>
<br>
either way, i am happy you’ve moved past that. i am sure others are too.<span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The authors have no issue<br>
with turning the 13.3.1 to the text below:<br>
{<br>
13.3.1 Random<br>
The member is chosen by AFRINIC at random between the membership.<br>
}<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
minor nit: s/between/from<br>
and, thanks! treating everyone equally feels less like a witch-hunt, eh? :-)<span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
We have noted your support to a v6.0 with the new 13.3.1 .<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
i support the changed text; but it is premature to say that this is support for a v6, since a v6 might include other changes that i might not support. sorry to split hairs, but let’s see the text for complete v6 first, ok?<span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Same for the two<br>
others who also opposed v5.0 for the same reason.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
i don’t think that either you or i, can do that. i would _assume_ that they support the changed text, as i do. but, it’s presumptive to call support for an as-yet unpublished document.<br>
<br>
again, thanks for the edit.<br>
<br>
<br>
i have a one more question:<br>
13.2 reads: “ and ASN mappable to two-octet ASNs.”.<br>
with the exception of IXP route-servers, afrinic no longer makes a distinction between these, and 32bit ASNs. this was a point that seemed to cause a lot of angst a the mic, in the discussion of the IXP resource reservation policies. given that:<br>
* operators don’t - or more correctly, can’t - care about the ASN that they’re allocated<br>
* bgp community support has been extended (and is only just waiting implementation), which means that part of the IXP reservation policy might not be needed in the future<br>
..why do you want to audit the two ASN types separately? surely, it’s not necessary to add: “and ASN mappable to two-octet ASNs” ?<br>
<br>
<br>
other than that, this reads ok to me. good luck. :-)<br>
<br>
—n.<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="https://www.xkcd.com/865/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.xkcd.com/865/</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>