On 07/15/2015 08:02 AM, hellekin wrote:
This is blunt in more than one aspect. That you consider squatting as a
negative is insulting for those people who actually need to rely on
squatting not to be excluded from society.
To expand on this ever so slightly, the reason why things like this
happen is because the process for approving special-use allocations is
perceived as too heavyweight, so people don't bother to do it in
anticipation of an experiment. Later, when the experiment proves a
success, it's too late, and that is characterized as squatting, when in
fact nobody had any intention of doing anything wrong, but were just
following the path of least resistance.
If we want to avoid future instances of squatting, it behooves us to
avoid applying too much process friction onto documents of this type.
Granted, it's hard to tell how much is too much, but this particular
discussion was kicked off in November of 2013, and here it is July of
2015, and we are still talking about it. That's a pretty heavy process.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
