Henk Uijterwaal wrote on 23-11-2008 13:08: > Danny McPherson wrote: > >>> I like the idea but I think this question should be asked on the RPSL >>> list as well before deciding which group should pick it up. >> >> What RPSL list are you referring to here? > > The RPSLng WG group kept its mailing list to discuss future extensions > (and a possible restart if necessary) of RPSL. The addres was > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
As far as I remember there was no formal RPSLng WG at the IETF. All work has been carried out through an individual submission on the mailinglist Henk mentioned. As for the rpslsig work, I support it. We might be worried a bit about the scope creep of SIDR, but I think that essentially the same group of people are going to be involved in reviewing rsplsig. So I support that SIDR takes this as a WG item. Andrei > Henk > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Henk Uijterwaal Email: > henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net > RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk > P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 > 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 > The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Ceterum censeo Asplain esse delendam (Cato & Henk) > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
