as-in/as-out

  > Elise Gerich <epg at merit.edu> writes:
  > Daniel, Tony, and Marten,
  > After our phone call last week, we (Merit) went round and round
  > about as-in/as-out and kept coming up with the same
  > pros and cons for having a new object or modifying the
  > current object.
  > 
  > What I'd like to do is present our extended syntax for
  > as-in/as-out to the ripe-routing-wg via email prior
  > to the RIPE meeting in May. 

That is quite OK. RIPE is an open forum.

  > The main reason for approaching the working group is to try
  > to foster consistency as a community - not as the NCC or Merit.
  > We are at greater risk of diverging further if we make a new
  > attribute, and then you modify as-in/as-out so that it is inconsistent
  > with the new attribute. If we work with the woking group, perhaps
  > we can get an agreed upon extension for as-in/as-out that we
  > both can live with. 

I think we should make another try to come up with a joint proposal.
Otherwise we run the risk of having no consensus at the end of the 
process or -even worse- a random consensus. 

Tony and I have provided an extensive motivated critique of your 
last proposal and have never heared back. Maybe we can start off there?

We will also have to add classless/aggregation support in this go.

Daniel






-------- Logged at  Wed Apr 27 13:39:26 MET DST 1994  ---------