On 23 May 2014, at 3:05 am, Joe Abley wrote:
> So, same basic question as before: given that rfc6304bis is already in wglc,
> do we think it's worthwhile adding a sentence to the text to request the IANA
> to add 112 to the "Special-Purpose AS Numbers" registry?
yes
_
On 23 May 2014, at 3:05 am, Joe Abley wrote:
> So, same basic question as before: given that rfc6304bis is already in wglc,
> do we think it's worthwhile adding a sentence to the text to request the IANA
> to add 112 to the "Special-Purpose AS Numbers" registry?
yes
_
On Thu, 22 May 2014, Joe Abley wrote:
On the other hand, AS 112 *is* special
So, same basic question as before: given that rfc6304bis is already in wglc, do we think
it's worthwhile adding a sentence to the text to request the IANA to add 112 to the
"Special-Purpose AS Numbers" registry?
On 5/22/14, 10:05 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
> William and I have heard the suggestion that we should add 112 to
> this registry. A convenient mechanism for doing so would be to add
> some IANA considerations to rfc6304bis.
start from first principles. the resource holder is the DNS-OARC which
has a st
Hi all, again :-)
RFC 7249, fresh off the presses, instantiates an IANA registry for
"Special-Purpose AS Numbers".
The initial registry contents are:
AS Numbers Reason for Reservation
- ---
0
