On Jan 19, 2012, at 7:52 AM, Randy Bush wrote: > of course, taking anything from the IRR literally is naïve at best.
Unfortunately, if the BGPSEC, RPKI and SIDR work stays course in the IETF, we're still going to need IRR-esque policy capabilities (outside of route server and prefix origin bindings in that work), so we best starting figuring out how to make them suck less. > some years back, i asked for a *simple minimal* tagging of announcements > to route views, just peer, customer, internal. it got ietfed to utter > uselessness, with more crap welded on to it than envisioned in mad max. I agree, it's important to analyze systemic cost/benefit and complexity analysis and new operational impacts various standards work is introducing. -danny
