E-Pals: I think we can safely cut this nonsense about policy being set by regional-techs, as the group has not attempted to do so. In fact, no group has authority to set Internet-wide policy. Certainly not the IAB or ISoc any more than regional-techs. Which was in fact the problem. As there is noone being able to set policy (or at least having enough guts to try), Scott W. had asked a group that is likely able to come up with a sound answer (regional techs, as their butts are on the line for at least the US part of the *operational* Internet infrastructure) for some guidance that he can take into consideration so he can achieve a better alignment between what he can do, and what the operational people want. We will not find answers for Scott for generations to come, but perhaps we can help him to make sound decisions for the next 6-12 months, after which time things will look quite different again anyway. If we can together cover 95% if the cases for now, that will be progress, the rest will have to be handled on a one-by-one basis, and fighting about "seeting policy about casting in stone who's a provider" is just academic at best. Hans-Werner PS: For that matter, at the regional-techs meeting early in the week, and totally unrelated to this discussion, the group had raised about not wanting to set policy. Though I personally believe it ain't that easy and many actions will have policy implications; if not today, then setting the stage for tomorrow's.