[178865] in North American Network Operators' Group
BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Yardiel D. Fuentes)
Thu Mar 12 15:01:36 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Yardiel D. Fuentes" <yardiel@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 15:01:26 -0400
To: nanog@nanog.org
Cc: bcop-support@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Hello NANOGers,
The NANOG BCOP committee is currently considering strategies on how to =
best create a numbering scheme for the BCOP appeals. As we all know, =
most public technical references (IETF, etc) have numbers to clarify =
references. The goal is for NANOG BCOPs to follow some sort of same =
style.
The BCOP committee is looking for feedback and comments on this topic.
Currently, the below numbering scheme is being considered:
A proposed numbering scheme can be based on how the appeals appeals in =
the BCOP topics are presented as shown below:
http://bcop.nanog.org/index.php/Appeals
In the above page, the idea is to introduce a 100-th range for each =
category and as the BCOPs. This way a 100th number range generally =
identifies each of the categories we currently have. An example is:
BCP Range Area of Practice
100 - 199 EBGPs =09
200 - 299 IGPs
300 - 399 Ethernet
400 - 499 Class of Service
500 - 599 Network Information Processing
600 - 699 Security
700 - 799 MPLS
800 - 899 Generalized
An arguable objection could be that the range is limited...but a =
counter-argument is that considering more than 100 BCOPs would be either =
a great success or just a sign of failure for the NANOG community ...
Comments or Thoughts ?
Yardiel Fuentes
