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] LACNIC "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)"
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] LACNIC "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] LACNIC "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Mar 26 16:28:34 CEST 2018
> On 26 Mar 2018, at 14:21, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net> wrote: > > The real meat of proposing a GIR is saying "let's have a new institution, that has > > - THIS structure > - THIS funding model > - THIS secretariat/support/NCC equivalent > - THIS type of PDP > - THIS model for who participates in the PDP (both in theory and practice) > etc. > > Until you have a proposal (at least in outline) for what that looks > like, you don't *have* a proposal at all, just a vague idea of address > management by Coca-Cola*. Indeed. IIRC the same points were made when there were vague proposals about the ITU becoming an RIR ~10 years ago. Those proposals were a bad idea then. So’s this LACNIC proposal now. And for many of the same reasons. Sigh.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] LACNIC "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] LACNIC "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]