Subject: [GROW] Terry Manderson's No Objection on draft-ietf-grow-irr-routing-policy-considerations-06: (with COMMENT)

From: "Terry Manderson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 05:26:46 -0700

Terry Manderson has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-grow-irr-routing-policy-considerations-06: 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 https://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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-irr-routing-policy-considerations/

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

Thank you for putting the effort into this draft!

The latest revision is improved, and addresses 98% of my comments when I
was wearing a routing area directorate reviewer hat. Mostly I'm pleased
to see a sentence in there which highlights that the RPKI doesn't carry
routing policy information. I think there is a very real undertone in
this document that shouldn't be avoided in that the RPKI takes steps to
routing security, but misses a mark on policy integrity.

I still don't buy the ideal that 10gig circuits are perceived as the norm
- but happy to let that go as a future ideal.. mores law and all :)

This document is one of the better outcomes of documenting in the IETF
what was (is) and why wrt routing.