Re: [sig-policy] Requests from routing/packeting concerns

To: Terry Manderson <terry at terrym dot net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Requests from routing/packeting concerns
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:30:55 +0900
Cc: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>, sig-policy at apnic dot net
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
In-reply-to: <11D92EF4-AF1B-458E-9265-7AB5BCAEC759 at terrym dot net>
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <49954E5C.90500@mesh.ad.jp> <m2skmiv82a.wl%randy@psg.com> <49995358.60508@nic.ad.jp> <49995D7F.9090505@nic.ad.jp> <49995ECE.8000906@nic.ad.jp> <m2d4di4k5o.wl%randy@psg.com> <499A4293.6070900@nic.ad.jp> <11D92EF4-AF1B-458E-9265-7AB5BCAEC759@terrym.net>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.3 (i386-apple-darwin9.6.0) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)

> route-ability of any prefix assigned then I guess a case of buyer  
> beware is appropriate.

i just don't get it.

why conject when you can actually test?  a lot of fud and black
helicopter worries when one can empirically determine how much of
the net will be able to connect to the prefix?

rancy