Hi Arturo, I'll reword the introduction to spell out the concern that the ipv4 and ipv6 address registries doe not explicitly state a routing preference.
I think with that understand the rest should be clear to you? Or no? Cheers Terry On 24/06/11 10:37 AM, "Arturo Servin" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Terry, > > In my mind I could see (although not very clearly) why we need this > document and why it is important. I think that it would be a good idea some > kind of justification and what problem we are trying to fix. > > Cheers, > as > > > On 21 Jun 2011, at 21:39, Terry Manderson wrote: > >> Chairs and WG, >> >> I seek your feedback on the I-D below. >> >> I'd also like to present this to the WG in Quebec. >> >> Cheers >> Terry >> >> >> ------ Forwarded Message >>> From: <[email protected]> >>> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:31:50 -0700 >>> To: Terry Manderson <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Terry Manderson <[email protected]> >>> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-manderson-routing-intent-00.txt >>> >>> A new version of I-D, draft-manderson-routing-intent-00.txt has been >>> successfully submitted by Terry Manderson and posted to the IETF repository. >>> >>> Filename: draft-manderson-routing-intent >>> Revision: 00 >>> Title: Signalling Public Routing Intent (PRI) for Internet >>> Protocol >>> Addresses in IANA Registries >>> Creation date: 2011-06-22 >>> WG ID: Individual Submission >>> Number of pages: 12 >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document provides direction to IANA to mark existing and future >>> IANA IPv4 and IPv6 allocations with generic terms pertaining to the >>> Public (global) Routing Intent (PRI). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> The IETF Secretariat >> >> ------ End of Forwarded Message >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GROW mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow > _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
