At Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:01:41 +1100, Geoff Huston wrote: > > Having explored such byways of additional validity states in earlier > iterations of this draft (see -00, for example), and receiving at the > time robust negative comment from WG members at the time as to the > wisdom and feasibility of such an approach, it is my impression that > most WG members with an active interest in this topic see no value > in adding further complexity to the ROA semantics beyond what is in > the current iteration of this draft. Having spent some time thinking > about this myself in revising this document in response to such > earlier comments, its a position with which I now personally favour > as well.
Strongly agree. Please keep this simple. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
