RE: New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks

["william(at)elan.net" <william () elan net>]

BTW - in the email it meant to be just stand DOS (Original IBM PC Operating
System based on CP/M), I automaticly write small "o" now when using this 
word because of how I've used it in the last sevaral years

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Michel Py wrote:
>
> > William,
> >
> > > william(at)elan.net wrote:
> > > [http://www.cymru.com/BGP/bogon-rs.html]
> > > Unfortunetly this is kind-of a bgp hack and as has
> > > been already mentioned it needs very carefull
> > > implemention
> >
> > This is not positive thinking. I don't consider this a hack (if it is,
> > then the draft that proposes to re-use ORF mechanisms is even worse).
> Quite a bit of difference I think, ORF is almost perfect fit for it.
>
> You seem to think that when I say its a hack it necessarily means its a 
> very bad thing. Not at all, I use(d) hacks in DoS, Windows, PalmOS, Linux,
> etc. all the time. Hacks often lead to real feature in the OS or program 
> in the future, which is hopefully what will happen here.
>
> > I'm not interested in what things were designed to do, I'm interested in
> > what things _can_ do.
> >
> > I use [Cymru] myself as I am within the applicability domain. I use your
> > stuff too. However, you might be borderline to abusing co-author
> > privileges here; Team Cymru has lead the route-server project for long,
> Nobody is disputing their longterm efforts in this area. 
>
> > and although the bogon list is by nature a lot less controversial than
> > what you do the bottom line is the acceptance of Cymru's feed is far
> > greater than Completewhois.
> There is no feed from completewhois to even try to compare at this time.
> (you can compare dns feed, but that is slightly different). And when 
> there is it might different purpose and one might better in one situation 
> or the other.
>
> > Please don't use draft-py-idr-redisfilter-01.txt as a platform to
> > compete with other co-authors; collaborative competition is sound,
> > please stay within its borders.
> I dont really compete with other authors at all, in fact its not even 
> easily possible as completewhois does not even provide production BGP feed 
> at this time. And I don't intend to make this into some kind or race 
> in the future either - the lists are different and have slightly different
> levels of activity they are trying to protect from. 
>
> And going OT here, I really do not see a problem with two or more
> implementations, we have this at many levels and reality is that it
> actually leads to highier degree of innovation. As an example I'm quite
> happy that there is both FreeBSD and Linux or both Gnome and K-Desktop.
> (although wars between proponents of one of the other can sometimes be a 
> bit disturbing). Its too bad on the other hand we only have one "Windows".