Julien(_dot_)Maisonneuve(_at_)alcatel(_dot_)com wrote:
...
I'm worried about the process, and about the number of times it seems to
be invoked.
Banning should be exceptional.
It is. RFC 3683 has been on the books since March 2004 and has been
used exactly zero times until now.
Now we are presented with two dubious
(read non obvious, possibly requiring very careful inspection to arrive
to a conclusion)
Of course they require careful inspection. How could it be otherwise?
cases in the space of a few days,
That, as far as I can tell, is pure coincidence.
and it appears that
the process itself is hardly symmetrical and lacks clear consensus
safeguards.
It has all the safeguards of any other IETF process - last call and
an appeal path. As for symmetry, I assume that that people will respond
both for and against the action during the last call.
In a balanced world, this would spell doom for RFC3683.
After we have executed the algorithm in 3683, we should certainly
consider whether it worked as intended, and if not, change it.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf