On 30/10/2009, at 12:50 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, Byron Ellacott wrote:
On 28/10/2009, at 11:30 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
naming of actors in this document still assumes that ISPs are the
children. children might be RIRs (parent IANA), or end sites
(parent
ISPs or owning non-end user sites (e.g. business subsidiaries or
govt
structures)).
I believe section 1.1 entirely addresses this point. The
definition of IR does not preclude service providers, nor does the
definition of ISP preclude either regional internet registries or
end sites. Summarised, they are:
IR : an entity undertaking the role of resource issuer.
ISP : an entity undertaking the role of resource recipient who is
the subject of a Resource Certificate.
Under this definition of ISP, would an RIR that received resources
from IANA and received a resource certificate for those resources be
an ISP?
Yes, in the context of the definition of terms for this document.
Would a global replace of "ISP" with "subject" and "IR" with "issuer"
be a sufficient resolution of this discussion?
Byron
_____________________________________________________________________
Byron Ellacott email: [email protected]
Technical Area Manager, APNIC sip: [email protected]
http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
