On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Stephen Kent <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Andy, The context for the discussion is address space transfer in the RPKI context. We don't have an RFC describing how to do that, AFAIK. So, when you say that this is the scenario we have today, to what are you referring? Steve On Jul 15, 2015, at 4:41 PM, Stephen Kent <<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Randy's view is that it is preferable to engineer a single solution that is agnostic about whether the address space is in use or not, even if that is a more complex solution. His rationale seems to be that its safer to treat all space as in use, so as to avoid the damage to users that arises if the entity transferring the space can't properly classify it properly. Isn’t the “unused” scenario what we have today? Why do we need a solution for something that is already being accomplished? -andy Steve, Given what I said initially in this thread, I thought we were talking about the same thing. I guess not. We could tease this apart, but is it worth it if “Randy’s view” covers all situations? -andy
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
