"Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers

Sat Feb 5 17:57:26 UTC 2011

On Feb 5, 2011, at 12:24 PM, John Curran wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2011, at 11:22 AM, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> 
>>   as you pointed out back in oh, IETF-29, actual network operators 
>>   don't participate much in the standards setting process so its
>>   no wonder RFC 2050 has (several) "blind-spots" when it comes to 
>>   operational reality.
>> 
>>   and pragmatically, I am not sure that one could come to a single
>>   consistent suite of polciy for management of number resource. there's
>>   just too many ways (some conflicting) to use them.  but this might be
>>   a sigma-six outlying POV.  ARIN's community certinly is dominated by
>>   a particular type of network operator.
> 
> To the extent that the operator community does not participate 
> in the open standards setting process in the IETF, and also opts 
> not to participate in the open policy development process in the 
> Regional Internet Registries, it is indeed challenging to make 
> sure that the outcomes meet any operational reality.  

In fairness, Operators are ruled by business needs.  Convincing management that we should spend money, time, and effort to change a process which _may_ have some relevance to the bottom line in some very obtuse (and completely unrelated - by accounting standards) way is difficult at best.

Add to that the fact most companies are squeezing their employees for every possible efficiency, and even spending your own time on it becomes difficult.

Despite all that, I agree it is difficult for the process to take operators' PoV into account if no operator is giving input.

> Since the results are useless for everyone if they don't work for 
> the operator community, there is obviously pressure to try to fairly 
> consider those needs as best understood, but it takes good inputs 
> into the system somewhere if we want reasonable outcomes.

We appreciate that.

And let's hope the operators will make some attempt at being more involved in the process.  (Guess I'll have to subscribe to PPML now, which I have been avoiding like the plague for years.)

-- 
TTFN,
patrick