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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region) going to Last Call
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region) going to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region) going to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Malcolm Hutty
malcolm at linx.net
Thu May 5 12:07:53 CEST 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 05/05/2011 10:50, John Curran wrote: > How is this different than network D deciding to build a network with > with an innovative routing technology, which may serve to distinguish > it in a positive (or negative) manner based on actual performance? This is different because it introduces a new party into the equation, X, who wants to impede reachability rather than improve it, and because X has legal power to supersede E's choices and override their self-interest. In your example, A is affected by the consequences of E trying to build a better network. Maybe E gets it wrong, and A suffers as a result too, but at least E is trying to do better and is likely to correct their behaviour or will gradually decline in influence. In Martin's example A is also affected by the consequences of X forcing E to reduce the connectivity of their network. E no longer has a choice, so he cannot "correct" his behaviour. Nor will E be easily superseded by competitor networks, because all his competitors are also subject to X. This could of course happen now - and I spend a large chunk of my time working to avoid this. In my view, handing X on a plate a mechanism to direct many Es all at once will greatly increase X's propensity to intervene. Political/legal control does make a qualitative difference. - -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd Maya House, 134-138 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LB Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3CdvkACgkQJiK3ugcyKhSjswCff7AGd+KvBUXZASJCK/qMmq6e jM8An0JvaSVih6nIGIp1Cf5F88rsOXna =VTdq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region) going to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region) going to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]