Subject: [Idr] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-03: (with COMMENT)

From: "Alissa Cooper" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:37:13 -0800

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-as-migration-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-as-migration/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 9:
"This could result in a
   loss of revenue if the ISP is billing based on measured utilization
   of traffic sent to/from entities attached to its network."

Considering loss of revenue in and of itself to be a security issue is a
slippery slope that we should probably not start to descend. I held my
nose for the revenue-related text in Section 1, but here in Section 9 it
seems particularly ill-advised.