[6bone] RFC2772 rewrite

[Robert J. Rockell]

How about something to the effect of:

"pTLA holder should be responsive.  Preferably, a response within 24 hours is
appreciated.  If a pTLA holder is non-responsive to repetitive requests for
assistance, or does not resolve a problem in a timely fasion, the 6bone
mailing serves as a great place to bring this issue to a greater audience.
Should a pTLA continually remain unresponsive to issues surrounding the
behavior of that pTLA, said pTLA holder may be subject to repremand, with
the potential of revocation of that pTLA, based on concensus by <some
steering group>"

I'll not commment as to whether my weekend qualifies as 'having a life' or
not, I do agree that 24 hours is a best effort practice... I've had our
sysadmins BREAK my e-mail for more than 24 hours, if you can belive that...

So 24 hours is a guideline, but not a 'move it or lose it' rule?

Make sense?


Thanks
Rob Rockell
SprintLink
(+1) 703-689-6322
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Paul Aitken wrote:

->Rob,
->
-> > If I don't hear anyone complain in 24 hours (good number to use)
-> > we'll stick that in there :)
->
->*complain*
->
->While I appreciate the sentiment behind this suggestion, and wouldn't be
->surprised to find that most folks on the list meet the requirement, I'd
->expect that there are some folks who do actually have a life and
->actually do non work-related things at the weekend <gasp!> and I
->wouldn't want to discourage that in any way!
->
->Besides, there are plenty of other times when we're out of touch for
->more than 24 hours, during which time we expect our networks to run
->happily without our constant supervision, right?
->
->As Daniel said:
->
-> > I don't think that 24hours is bad for a *response* - maybe not
-> > resolution though.
->
->An autoresponder or ticketing system would meet the response requirement
->without actually dealing with the problem in any way :-(
->
->So what are we trying to achieve? To force the pTLA holder to respond,
->or to encourage them to resolve the technical issue? What would happen
->if it took 48 hours to respond to an issue - would the time police
->reject the holder's pTLA? Will someone volunteer to be "big brother" to
->ensure timely responses?
->
->Perhaps all we should ask is that "the applicant agrees to respond to
->technical problems in a timely fashion", and leave discernment to each
->case as appropriate?
->
->Cheers.
->--
->Paul Aitken
->IPv6 Development, Cisco Systems Ltd, Edinburgh, Scotland.
->