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]/
[connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
- Previous message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
- Next message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Matthias Wichtlhuber
matthias.wichtlhuber at de-cix.net
Wed Jun 12 16:14:24 CEST 2024
Hi Paul, I understand the need for a revision, and that’s precisely the issue and far from irrelevant. If rejection based on broad implementation (whatever that means and how it should be assessed) is valid, Stavros can write as many revisions as he wants, there is always ground for rejecting this BCOP. More broadly this approach would discourage us from focusing on good practices and instead compel us to document the status quo, regardless of how mediocre it may be. Regards, Matthias On 10.06.24, 19:26, "Paul Hoogsteder" <paul at meanie.nl <mailto:paul at meanie.nl>> wrote: Hello Matthias, That is completely irrelevant. What matters is consensus, and based on what we've heard from some very knowledgeable people in this industry is that they have identified many issues that need to be addressed. I suggest you focus on addressing these first, not just on the mailing list but especially in the proposal itself. Paul. > Hi Paul, > > I think it would be fair game to quote the preceding paragraph as well: > > "The BCOP TF brings together people to identify operational issues and > motivate operators to document good operational practices *that are agreed > upon between two or more parties*. [...] > > The main interest of the task force is that current operational practice > are captured and documents are published." [1] > > I don't see how this justifies an objection to this proposal based on > broad implementation. The authors have obviously agreed on this practice > and I count five of them. > > Regards, > Matthias > > [1] https://www.ripe.net/community/tf/bcop/ <https://www.ripe.net/community/tf/bcop/> > > -- > > Dr.-Ing. Matthias Wichtlhuber > Team Lead Research and Development > ------------------------------ > DE-CIX Management GmbH > Lindleystr. 12, 60314 Frankfurt (Germany) > phone: +49 69 1730902 141 > mobile: +49 171 3836036 > fax: +49 69 4056 2716 > e-mail: matthias.wichtlhuber at de-cix.net <mailto:matthias.wichtlhuber at de-cix.net> > <mailto:matthias.wichtlhuber at de-cix.net <mailto:matthias.wichtlhuber at de-cix.net>> > web: www.de-cix.net <http://www.de-cix.net/> <http://www.de-cix.net/>> > ------------------------------ > DE-CIX Management GmbH > Executive Directors: Ivaylo Ivanov and Sebastian Seifert Trade registry: > District court (Amtsgericht) Cologne, HRB 51135 Registered office: > Lichtstr. > 43i, 50825 Cologne > > > > > _______________________________________________ > connect-wg mailing list > connect-wg at ripe.net <mailto:connect-wg at ripe.net> > https://mailman.ripe.net/ <https://mailman.ripe.net/> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change > your subscription options, please visit: > https://mailman.ripe.net/ <https://mailman.ripe.net/> > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2707 bytes Desc: not available URL: </ripe/mail/archives/connect-wg/attachments/20240612/e4e2eeab/attachment.p7s>
- Previous message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
- Next message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]