Carlos, On Jun 8, 2006, at 3:25 AM, Carlos Friacas wrote:
More seriously, impositions of subjective evaluations like figuring out what is "reasonable" are generally things to be avoided. Also, vagueness of terms such as "own/related departments/entities/sites" are just begging for abuse. A person is an entity. Should an organization with a "reasonable" number of people justify a /32?
That's going again on the subjective side... :-(
Right.
We had enough with the 200-hurdle already, right?
There is a difference between subjective and arbitrary. 200 is arbitrary. It was a number picked out of thin air that was felt to be a reasonable compromise. However, once that number has been chosen, it can be objectively verified. The problem with subjective values like "reasonable" is that it leaves it to the registry staff to figure out what the right value is. This is an icky place to be as it can change depending on day, mood of the registry person, phase of moon, etc. In my opinion, arbitrary is OK (not perfect, but workable as long as the arbitrary number is reached by consensus). Subjective is just asking for trouble. Rgds, -drc