Moin, > RFC 1930 is documentation of historical consensus, and it contributes > to policy in 2025 rather than specifying it. The kind of policy I > mean is more commonly developed in other organisations and > communities today than the IETF. > > It's not clear to me how grow spending time on this would be useful, > given that context. Changing the status of 1930 or replacing it with > another document (or both) unilaterally seems far more likely to > cause headaches than clarity.
Well, the core reason would be that i am currently participating in a discussion in an RIR's address policy WG where some see BCP6 more like a BCP and less like a documentation of historic consensus. So, in essence: - I agree with your point w.r.t. "RFC 1930 is documentation of historical consensus" - I somewhat think that it could be useful to make that explicit With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M [email protected] Pronouns: he/him/his _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
