20040504 07:51:38 | jabber@irc | jabber has joined the channel.
20040504 07:52:44 | jabber@irc | jabber has joined the channel.
20040504 13:58:48 | jabber@irc | jabber has joined the channel.
20040504 13:58:48 | OperServ@irc | OperServ has joined the channel.
20040504 14:37:57 | jabber@irc | jabber has joined the channel.
20040505 06:57:28 | koopal@irc | koopal has joined the channel.
20040505 08:28:27 | mally@irc | mally has joined the channel.
20040505 08:28:30 | mally@irc | morning
20040505 08:40:47 | emma@irc | emma has joined the channel.
20040505 08:40:51 | emma@irc | emma has left the channel.
20040505 09:08:27 | iljitsch@jabber | iljitsch has become available
20040505 09:08:31 | marcoh@irc | marcoh has joined the channel.
20040505 09:15:45 | davew@irc | davew has joined the channel.
20040505 09:15:58 | niallm@irc | niallm has joined the channel.
20040505 09:16:44 | Aziraphal@irc | Aziraphal has joined the channel.
20040505 09:16:46 | iljitsch@jabber | Here is some text I wrote after the september RIPE meeting about the HD ratio. I think it makes my point better than I just did at the mike.
20040505 09:17:31 | iljitsch@jabber | ah and here's the url: http://www.bgpexpert.com/archive2003q3.php#12
20040505 09:20:44 | Doug@jabber | Doug has become available
20040505 09:21:13 | Doug@jabber | hey folks, is this the address policy room?
20040505 09:21:24 | davew@irc | it is
20040505 09:21:54 | Doug@jabber | excellent :)
20040505 09:22:03 | Doug@jabber |  I see the irc <> jabber gateway is working as well
20040505 09:24:13 | iljitsch@jabber | yes but everyone is keeping quiet.  :-)
20040505 09:24:37 | Doug@jabber | well, leo is such a captivating speaker ...
20040505 09:27:59 | Aziraphal@irc | does the gw work the other way too?
20040505 09:28:14 | davew@irc | since doug saw my answer, i guess so :)
20040505 09:28:41 | iljitsch@jabber | so why are most people on irc anyway? jabber is much cooler...
20040505 09:29:00 | davew@irc | what's your client of choice?
20040505 09:29:03 | Aziraphal@irc | jabber doesn't work for me
20040505 09:29:10 | Aziraphal@irc | server keeps dropping me
20040505 09:29:12 | Doug@jabber | it's easier to reach the stuff from the outside world on irc
20040505 09:29:44 | Doug@jabber | and actually, the jabber server for the conference doesn't do ssl, so it's not _that_ much cooler :)
20040505 09:30:05 | Doug@jabber | davew: I use psi, because it is cross platform, and open source
20040505 09:30:17 | iljitsch@jabber | I use Psi on the Mac. Not a great fan, though. I like Apple's iChat a lot but this uses AIM.  :-(
20040505 09:30:22 | davew@irc | must check. i wasn't that impressed by the few jabber clients i tried.
20040505 09:30:33 | davew@irc | trillian pro on windows works for me though
20040505 09:30:47 | iljitsch@jabber | but then not so many dos attacks so that's in favor of jabber.  :-)
20040505 09:30:47 | Doug@jabber | http://psi.affinix.com/
20040505 09:30:51 | davew@irc | but i'm not using that much on the RIPE wavelan, cos i've no idea what's encrypted and what's not :o)
20040505 09:31:16 | Doug@jabber | a lot of my windows colleagues use trillian, it has some nice features, but I try to spend as much time as possible booted in freebsd
20040505 09:31:21 | Doug@jabber | so, no trillian for me
20040505 09:31:37 | marcoh@irc | dave: just  consider nothing to be enncrypted
20040505 09:31:42 | Doug@jabber | yeah, the jabber stuff is a mixed bag
20040505 09:31:49 | davew@irc | marcoh: funnilly enough, that's why i'm not using it :)
20040505 09:31:50 | marcoh@irc | I have verything running on ssh
20040505 09:32:00 | koopal@irc | dave: assume notting is, and arrange encryption end to end
20040505 09:32:07 | Doug@jabber | *nod* good policy
20040505 09:32:39 | iljitsch@jabber | well this will all be on the web site later so encrypting it now doesn't do all that much good...
20040505 09:33:02 | Doug@jabber | heh
20040505 09:33:35 | Doug@jabber | well, if they post the logs of the rooms, that may explain why everyone is being so quiet :)
20040505 09:41:03 | davew@irc | ooh
20040505 09:41:12 | davew@irc | arin's policy is now ARIN have changed it to "200 /48s within 5 years OR be an existing known ISP in
20040505 09:41:12 | davew@irc | the ARIN region"
20040505 09:41:26 | davew@irc | pardon the cut/paste mistake
20040505 09:41:44 | niallm@irc | I wonder what their definition of ISP is?
20040505 09:42:14 | davew@irc | it was just mentioned on the mike, so i don't have a URL reference, but i dare say the policy is findable
20040505 09:42:32 | niallm@irc | 5 years is a better time-frame for handling startups.
20040505 09:43:31 | niallm@irc | Alas, the devil is probably in the details on that one - but it may be a better place than where we are currently.
20040505 09:43:39 | davew@irc | true
20040505 09:43:57 | Doug@jabber | well from my perspective, the more clarification that we can get on this stuff, the better
20040505 09:44:38 | davew@irc | i dare say it can be approached in a different way in the RIPE region. Not quite going back to Gert's "Are you a LIR? []yes []no" but there is probably a way to massage "is known" in a way suitable for the RIPE region
20040505 09:44:41 | niallm@irc | Someone should ring Mirjam up and get her to clarify it ;-)
20040505 09:44:50 | davew@irc | hehe
20040505 09:44:58 | Doug@jabber | heh
20040505 09:45:41 | niallm@irc | davew: Are the goals clear for this policy?
20040505 09:46:28 | davew@irc | niallm: the current one or the ARIN one? some goals are becoming clear in the discussion, because as wilfried put it they are held in a number of different brains, and the discussion is helping to enumerate these
20040505 09:46:52 | davew@irc | not so much goals for the policy as reasons why the wording is the way it is
20040505 09:47:24 | niallm@irc | Where's Thomas Narten when you need him?
20040505 09:47:57 | davew@irc | THANK YOU
20040505 09:47:59 | niallm@irc | I suspect the wording is the way it is because there are goals to be achieved.
20040505 09:48:06 | Aziraphal@irc | davew: :)
20040505 09:48:24 | niallm@irc | davew: Leap up and down and approve
20040505 09:48:38 | davew@irc | the irc logs will cut it
20040505 09:49:24 | niallm@irc | Some of these goals are mutually antagonistic: making sure people can actually get and use the space, making sure the scope of mistakes is limited, making sure that use can be tracked...
20040505 09:51:17 | davew@irc | Aziraphal: even if we get it wrong in 2001::/16 then we have plenty of opportunities to get it right
20040505 09:51:32 | niallm@irc | The situation is different from v4. Classless is necessary for efficient use of a scarce resource. The idea in v6 is to have more addresses.
20040505 09:51:33 | davew@irc | i think there are other issues much more likely to bite us than conservation
20040505 09:51:35 | Aziraphal@irc | true, true
20040505 09:53:21 | Aziraphal@irc | what's really strange is that the bar for v6 allocations is *higher*
20040505 09:53:44 | davew@irc | that's deliberate to some extent, as end-users have the opportunity to get PI space in v4 but not in v6
20040505 09:53:48 | niallm@irc | Yes. The argument for this used to be "We don't understand it, therefore we have to make it more difficult to get."
20040505 09:53:55 | davew@irc | this is a matter of aggregation rather than conservation aiui
20040505 09:54:32 | Aziraphal@irc | it's an impediment to v6 uptake and creates a catch-22
20040505 09:54:49 | davew@irc | ack. cf gert's radical proposal
20040505 09:54:51 | niallm@irc | As it was N years ago, Aziraphal!
20040505 09:55:38 | denesh@irc | denesh has joined the channel.
20040505 09:55:42 | Aziraphal@irc | yeah well, if it had been more reasonable N years ago, v6 uptake would have been better
20040505 09:55:50 | niallm@irc | There have been a stream of radical proposals for lowering the bar to v6 allocations, but none have been 'foolproof'.
20040505 09:56:02 | niallm@irc | == accepted by community and by RIR
20040505 09:57:12 | Doug@jabber | well, I'm not overly concerned about the number of addresses, I'm really more concerned about the routing issues
20040505 09:57:49 | niallm@irc | Doug: You and the rest of the world! I don't know where that discussion is presently.
20040505 09:58:01 | Aziraphal@irc | there wouldn't be routing issues if vendors wouldn't use 80s technology in their products :(
20040505 09:58:15 | Doug@jabber | heh
20040505 09:58:33 | davew@irc | we should use 70s technology like UNIX?
20040505 09:59:29 | Aziraphal@irc | davew: :p   proper VMs and memory mgmt would help with big routing tables...
20040505 10:00:23 | Doug@jabber | hey, you could look at unix as 70's technology, or technology with 30 years of experience :)
20040505 10:06:18 | iljitsch@jabber | the trouble is that people aren't very radical. I talked about geographic aggregation a ripe or two back and I only got blank stares. Would solve having PI AND aggregation, though. (Yes, there are difficulties but they're all non-fatal IMNSHO.)
20040505 10:06:18 | iljitsch@jabber | ping?
20040505 10:06:41 | davew@irc | iljitsch: ack
20040505 10:07:22 | niallm@irc | iljitsch: It's not just blank stares, it's active hostility
20040505 10:07:39 | Aziraphal@irc | that would be that proposal with the mandatory ICBM address?
20040505 10:10:53 | Aziraphal@irc | Aziraphal quit IRC altogether
20040505 10:12:18 | iljitsch@jabber | no that's tony hain's geo stuff. the geo address plan michel py and i can up with is based on cities and so on. So I guess they have to nuke the whole city if they don't like you.  :-(
20040505 10:14:21 | iljitsch@jabber | niallm: no I did it twice, once for the ipv6 crowd and they didn't like it much, once for routing and they just didn't care i guess. But the people in the IETF don't like it. Too bad.
20040505 10:15:14 | davew@irc | davew quit IRC altogether
20040505 10:15:49 | Doug@jabber | Well, this has been fun folks :)
20040505 10:15:59 | Doug@jabber | Doug has left
20040505 10:16:56 | iljitsch@jabber | iljitsch has left
20040505 10:21:30 | marcoh@irc | marcoh has left the channel.
20040505 10:21:48 | niallm@irc | w
20040505 10:21:59 | niallm@irc | oops wrong window
20040505 10:23:38 | denesh@irc | denesh has left the channel.
20040505 10:23:43 | niallm@irc | niallm quit IRC altogether
20040505 11:44:34 | mally@irc | mally has left the channel.
20040505 11:58:28 | koopal@irc | koopal has left the channel.