This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Re: Re: Unique prefixes for all proposals
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: Unique prefixes for all proposals
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: Unique prefixes for all proposals
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Remco Van Mook
Remco.vanMook at eu.equinix.com
Wed Nov 24 17:01:40 CET 2010
I'm more than happy to support your idea for the naming convention of policy proposals. I'll stick to my point of the actual documents however - history does not soft-link. Especially when people are expected to comply (which is the main reason for both protocol and policy to begin with) it's crucial to have a single name attached to it. Eternal confusion arises when you don't. Remco > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Hartmann [mailto:richih.mailinglist at gmail.com] > Sent: woensdag 24 november 2010 15:37 > To: Remco Van Mook > Cc: Daniel Roesen; address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: Unique prefixes for all proposals > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 14:15, Remco Van Mook > <Remco.vanMook at eu.equinix.com> wrote: > > > Since policy proposals are transient and RIPE documents are permanent, I > would strongly urge to stay away from any attempt to rename or renumber > RIPE documents. RFCs don't get renamed or renumbered either, and for very > good reason. > > Renumbering is out of the question for obvious reasons. > > _If_ the naming scheme for documents were to be changed, it would need > to happen in a fully backwards compatible way. For example, an existing ripe- > 1234 would still be ripe-1234, but ripe-doc-1234 could be used as a "soft link" > to it. For the _new_ document ripe-doc-2345 might be used as the sole name > from the beginning. > > But again, this is not part of my initial proposal. I went with a simple and, > hopefully, uncontroversial proposal first. If and when other naming schemes > should be evaluated as well will need to be determined later. Unless there is > a general consensus that we should do it all at once. In which case I would > not be opposed to discussing this, either. > > > Richard This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately. Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office: Quadrant House, 4 Thomas More Square, London E1W 1YW. Registered in England and Wales, No. 6293383.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: Unique prefixes for all proposals
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: Unique prefixes for all proposals
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]