Hi Raphael,

> I think as long as nobody is announcing this out to the general Internet,

There is a reason why we have bogus prefix announcements for years. So, be
ready for some loud noise.

>³Any service with local-only significance within the autonomous system²,
and not limit
>the use? I can see some other interesting uses that would not require
>global routability, but need slightly more flexibility/reachability than
>the usual RFC1918 space.

Yes, I agree and support this view, the scope should be global.

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui


On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Raphael Ho <[email protected]>wrote:

> I think as long as nobody is announcing this out to the general Internet,
> this is an interesting proposal. If the prefix is allowed out on the
> public Internet uncontrolled then I have a problem with potential DNS
> hijacking and other issues (and I agree with Mr Hannigan that¹s where IETF
> needs to come in)
>
> Assuming that the members agree that the prefix would not be internet
> reachable, do we want expand the scope of the proposal to ³Any service
> with local-only significance within the autonomous system², and not limit
> the use? I can see some other interesting uses that would not require
> global routability, but need slightly more flexibility/reachability than
> the usual RFC1918 space.
>
>
>
> On 27/1/14 12:26 pm, "Hannigan, Martin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >That and isn't the IETF the right venue to carve out a specific from a
> >/8? This is in effect global policy, isn't it?
> >
> >
> >On Jan 25, 2014, at 8:24 PM, Randy Bush <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> and why won't this leak and make confusion?
> >>
> >> randy
> >> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> >>      *
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> sig-policy mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> >*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> >    *
> >_______________________________________________
> >sig-policy mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>     *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to