Subject: [GROW] Requesting Grow's review of draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-02.txt

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:37:53 -0500

Peter and Chris: 

We request that the GROW WG review
draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-02.txt?
(http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation/)

Since it modifies RFC 1930, a BCP, it is likely to be a BCP.  The draft
deals with the creation of Private USE ASN space in 4 byte octets. 

Two additional questions we'd love input on:  

1.     Do they think the range is too big, too small, or just right"  (We'll
call this the 3 bears question (smile))

2.     Would they prefer to see the range reserved with some portion of the
range allocated? 

For example, reserve all the space but allocate only 50% of the space. 

This draft has had substantial IDR debate which is (of course) online, and
has been through IDR WG LC. 

We'd appreciate hearing about any operational issues GROW finds with this
draft. 

Thank you, 

John and Sue

---

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:22:31 -0500

On Dec 21, 2012, at 5:37 PM, "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Peter and Chris:
>  
> We request that the GROW WG review  draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-02.txt?   (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation/)
>  
> Since it modifies RFC 1930, a BCP, it is likely to be a BCP.  The draft deals with the creation of Private USE ASN space in 4 byte octets.
>  
> Two additional questions we’d love input on:  
>  
> 1.     Do they think the range is too big, too small, or just right”  (We’ll call this the 3 bears question (smile))
> 2.     Would they prefer to see the range reserved with some portion of the range allocated?
>  
> This draft has had substantial IDR debate which is (of course) online, and has been through IDR WG LC.
>  
> We’d appreciate hearing about any operational issues GROW finds with this draft.

As someone who reads both GROW and IDR I'd just like to more that there has already been some operators providing input over on the IDR list...
This is not intended to discourage GROWers from commenting, but rather a suggestion that before erupting in indignation (or giggles!) you have a quick look @ the IDR threads on this…
They may:
a: address your concerns or
b: provide you with more ammunition for making your case :-P

W

>  
> Thank you,
>  
> John and Sue
>  
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

--
For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
                -- H. L. Mencken

---

From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 00:34:17 +0100

> As someone who reads both GROW and IDR

On this cross post ...

I really do not know who is subscribed to GROW and would not be
subscribed  to IDR ... Could corresponding chairs run a mailer diff
and at least check how many folks is not on both lists ?

But formally this is good. At least the IETF last call will go smooth(er) ;)

I think Sue forgot to set some deadline for comments - not sure if
everyone just implicitly assumes two weeks.

Best wishes,
R.

---

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:45:19 -0500

Warren:

Thank you for the good comments.  To help the discussion not repeat itself,
please do see the idr list.  

The time period to comment is 2 weeks with comment period ending on
1/4/2013. 

Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: Warren Kumari [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 6:23 PM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: Warren Kumari; [email-masked]; 'Susan Hares'; Jon Mitchell (GNS); 'John
G. Scudder'; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [GROW] Requesting Grow's review of
draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-02.txt

> 1.     Do they think the range is too big, too small, or just right"
(We'll call this the 3 bears question (smile))
draft.

As someone who reads both GROW and IDR I'd just like to more that there has
already been some operators providing input over on the IDR list...
This is not intended to discourage GROWers from commenting, but rather a
suggestion that before erupting in indignation (or giggles!) you have a
quick look @ the IDR threads on this. They may:
a: address your concerns or
b: provide you with more ammunition for making your case :-P

W

--
For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and
wrong.
                -- H. L. Mencken