[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: <dnsop@cafax.se>
From: "Ray Plzak" <plzak@arin.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 22:11:23 -0500
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <E190rmM-0004eY-00@ran.psg.com>
Sender: owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-04.txt


Policies are applied to the ISPs to whom the address space is allocated
or assigned by the RIR.  If an upstream further assigns to a downstream,
they generally apply the policy of the RIR to that space as in the end
it will affect the relationship of the upstream to the RIR when
requesting additional space.   An example would be the reporting of
utilization.  In some cases there are policies that affect operations,
such as those pertaining to multihoming which are also generally passed
down by the upstream.  On the other hand there is no policy in regards
to setting filters with regard to the space allocated as this is the
purview of the operator as it is independent of the amount of space that
has been allocated by an RIR to an ISP and pertains to routing which is
not the purview of the RIR.  Hope this helps.

Ray  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 6:36 PM
> To: Ray Plzak
> Cc: dnsop@cafax.se
> Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-04.txt
> 
> 
> > If the purpose of this draft is to propose policy, then it 
> should not be
> > an item for the WG, but should be put into the RIR policy process.
> 
> the document seems to suggest policy for both isps and for 
> rirs.  do the
> rirs see themselves as the venue to set *isps'* policies?  
> maybe we can
> learn to share the blame <g>.
> 
> randy
> 

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.

Home | Date list | Subject list