[address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA allocation size
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA allocation size
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA allocation size
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeff Williams
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Thu Jan 15 05:29:37 CET 2004
Randy, Gert and all, Randy Bush wrote: > > So please: constructive criticism is welcome, but things like > > "all that you do is wrong, because APNIC is doing something!" > > (and no further reason or detail given) are just wasting our > > time. > > excuse! where did i say that? please do not put stupid words into > my keyboard, i do that well enough. i merely responded to what i > considered an unwise statement which sets an incorrect atmosphere > and could become a quoted precident set by a co-chair of this wg. > > >>> So if we send out a formal proposal to change RIPE things to > >>> RIPE lists, and nobody from the RIPE community objects - what's > >>> wrong with assuming consensus, then? > > i still consider this unwise, and for the reasons i stated. and, > in the face of such statements, i do not consider pointing out that > we are making, or proposing to make, policy that affects the global > internet a waste of time. if you feel it wastes yours, you have a > delete key. Your response here Randy was a bit harsh, as I am sure you are aware of and intended. However am I wrong in my understanding on these exchanges on this thread that a rift in differences of ideology has crept into the policy making process here unto engaged? As Randy well knows I do not often agree with his ideas or point of view. But in this instance I certainly do. It is at least unwise and I contend impossible for any WG to decide what an initial PA allocation size should be without the known and measured consensus of those directly and indirectly effected. Yet a global view and policy is prudent if not necessary. This said, it is also understandable that Gert's view from a RIPE Regional/local view in setting a initial PA allocation size may have some Regional/local advantages but could/would cause a disparency on a global business basis.. As such a need for a global policy is more attractive if it is crafted to meet or even slightly exceed a known current need and a far future need... > > > randy Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!) "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" - Pierre Abelard "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA allocation size
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA allocation size
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]