I've reviewed draft-ietf-grow-unique-origin-as-00 and think it presents
an interesting proposal.
My only concern is the explosion of requests asking for 2 bytes (now
scarce) and claiming that they are for critical infrastructure. I am not sure
if the draft should mention that 4-bytes ASN should be preferred.
Other observations are:
- As previously commented, I think the reference to RIR policies should
not be in "IANA Considerations". Nevertheless I find important to mention that
RIR policies play an important role in how ASNs are allocated.
- I do not see the relevance to use "[RENESYS-BLOG]" as a reference.
May be I am missing the argument.
Regards,
-as
On 17 Dec 2010, at 02:54, Peter Schoenmaker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to issue last call for draft-ietf-grow-unique-origin-as-00. We
> will close last call Jan 2nd 2011.
>
> Please review the draft and provide any last comments.
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
