This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeff Williams
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Thu Jan 8 22:46:13 CET 2004
Michael and all, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote: > >The policy needs to balance everyones needs > > Yes. > > >(among that: "little extra routes in the DFZ"). > > DFZ (default free zone) = global routing table. > If someone can implement a solution by announcing a > shorter prefix from an existing netblock then there is > nothing that RIPE can do to change the number of routes > in the global routing table. > > >The policy does also need very clear-cut criteria to *decide* whether > >something meets the policy or not. Applying technical criteria is easy > >(easier, at least) than a fuzzy term like "critical infrastructure" > >that mean something different to whoever reads it. > > Yes. And a good policy would start by defining the fuzzy term so > that everyone understands the scope of the term when it is used > in the policy. > > >Commenting on your first example: for the USA, something might very > >well be a "critical infrastructure", like the US power grid, and *still* > >the rest of the world might not care much if it breaks down... - so > >the definition of "criticial infrastructure" is very much localized and > >fuzzy. > > Yes. The word "critical" is a value judgement. Critical Internet > Infrastructure > is different from Critical National Infrastructure. In the USA they are > focusing on infrastructure that is critical to their nation. We should > look at infrastructure that is critical to the Internet, both globally > and in the RIPE region. Good! Your finnaly "getting it"! >:) > > > --Michael Dillon Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!) "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" - Pierre Abelard "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]