On 2 Apr 2025, at 02:44, Greg Skinner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Perhaps changing the status of 1930 to Historic would suffice for now. I > agree with the comments about the distinction between AS definition and AS > policy; those could be included as part of the reason for the status change. > There are other practices in 1930 that have been updated. Unfortunately, > producing a new RFC (even if it is an update) can be long and complex. Although in the face of it I agree that reclassifying as historic sounds sensible, even small changes to status can have unexpected consequences elsewhere in the policy apparatus. I suggest that before this working group rolls its sleeves up on anything, the idea should at minimum take a trip through the IAB who can exercise its various liaisons to convene a wider conversation that includes other organisations. The landscape is wider than just this mailing list. If there are changes to be made here, it's definitely more work than it seems. It the known problem is just one conversation in one working group at one RIR, the most expedient approach might just be to take the right people to the bar in Lisbon and talk this over. Joe _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
