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] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
David Croft
david at sargasso.net
Wed Oct 31 02:28:37 CET 2007
On 31/10/2007, David Conrad <david.conrad at icann.org> wrote: > The fact that _you_ can't see a routing announcement for a particular prefix > does NOT mean the prefix isn't announced somewhere. There are these things > called "private networks" and they do interconnect outside of the context of > the "public" Internet. I'm sorry, I might be missing some enormous point here, but since when were these companies sold IP addresses or given indefinite title to them? If they received them legitimately and they are in active use then they have a responsiblity to keep the contact information up to date, as per their original agreement (presumably... barring some huge historical cock-up). I say, for every prefix not in the routing table, that is not registered under a paid-up LIR or equivalent, send them repeated automated communications and if they fail to respond, *they* have neglected *their* responsibilities and have lost their right to a loan of a finite pubic resource. If they do not keep up with their responsibilities to keep their records up to date, then why should they be treated any different from the gazillion former class Bs that no longer exist? And why should we be concerned about keeping their networks running when they have no concern about the operation of our internet? If we can't distinguish betwen the legitimate class B holders and the Erie Forge and Steels, then why should it be our burden to do so? Why must we pander to the 5% of those guys who even still exist when they refuse to cooperate? David
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]