stla registry db issue

[Kazu Yamamoto (山本和彦)]

From: Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: stla registry db issue

> My concern is that the way Kazu asked his question, with the concern
> about frequent updates, did not seem compatible with the idea of
> slow start and hierarchical aggregation. If we don't start with
> habits that create aggressive aggregation, IPv6 routing will be in
> deep trouble as it grows.

We never discuss routing problems. We are talking about issues on
registry DB updates.

> I also have a concern that if an operator is really an ISP, giving
> them an NLA instead of a subTLA may be a problem until we have
> proved how to do convenient renumbering. What happens when they want
> to migrate away from using WIDE as their aggregator? (I realise that
> this is a heretical thought, since the current rules on subTLAs are
> more restrictive.)

This is also out of the scope of kenken's question.

Kenken asked how to eat an apple. You said it is not an orange.

> However, I agree that Kazu is not describing a strict violation of
> the RFCs.

I don't see *any* violation. Our activities are consistent to all
RFCs, I believe.

--Kazu