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/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sven Olaf Kamphuis
sven at cb3rob.net
Mon Mar 1 16:19:38 CET 2010
There you go. let the riots commence 2.0.... keep in mind, most telcos and ISPs (the founders and members of the current IANA -> RIRS -> LIRs model resulting in a global internet which is hard to censor) do not agree on this ITU proposal... it's just that the UN and their ITU do... If we allow them to go forward, this WILL result in a "per country" easy-to-filter internet in a few years when ipv6 is the only serious protocol left. we only need to point out how easy it was for the DDR to simply route all phonecalls to "the west" through a room where people monitored telephone conversations, and this "country specific prefix" is just what the ITU seems to want for the internet. In order to accomplish that they want to create their own address registry, for now "secondary" to the ISP/telco run bottom-down RIR system (RIPE,ARIN,APNIC,AFRINIC,APNIC) but ofcourse we can't expect it to take long before repressive governments start to force "the internets" "in their country" to use only the ITU registry... also very nice of them to invite the "RIRS" to be present at their little negotiation rounds, where the RIRS can each have one vote against oh eh, 150 or so of their members... very democratic.. 5 against 150.. And i bet you they'll go "yes but the RIRs were present at our meetings" in the end, so its better to just send them a letter telling them to stick it where the sun doesn't shine and not even go to their little meetings. How does this relate to our situation in germany: Now for those complaining about me posting to the piratenpartei lists in ENOTGERMAN, too bad for you people... the world is slightly larger than those 140 million or so people that use german on a daily basis. I can personally assure you von der leyen and schaubele would have had wet dreams about this ITU proposal a few months ago still..., and you never know, we may get simular politicians again in the future... (makes it -really- easy to filter all kinds of government-undesired content and activities...) now -we- can always move our office to some other country and take our tax money to some other resort, not a biggie, but don't come complaining to me when germany at some point uses this to build their own chinese bigass golden firewall with flames coming out of its ass to make it faster. i'd say its better to simply not give them the chance to do so. methods available to isps/telcos to stop this: - point out to governments that -we- own the internet, their economy runs over it as a "courtesy" and that we can send them back to the stoneage at any time we like by simply dropping 'their' traffic. (considering the fact that governments themselves are not capable of running anything but a gray-cheese-with-a-dial telephone network, they don't have any other option than to remain friends with us, while -we- can move our business to -any- of the 208 countries or so worldwide, wether the UN likes those countries or not, and pay taxes -there-, and most of the likely candidates are nice and warm and have a beach too and are willing to make deals in the "guaranteed information freedom" aspect ;) - if they get this done, simply ignore their registry, maybe introduce overlaps - if they get this done, drop the whole ipv6 implementation plans and move on to some "next" protocol or even keep ipv4 around if we have to. they need us, we don't need them Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what has your country ever done for you. we have the biggest stick in this matter. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 15:52:04 +0100 From: Michiel Ettema <MEttema at alkmaar.nl> To: members-discuss at ripe.net Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group Maybe this will give you an insight in what is planned: http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/oth/01/0B/D010B0000073301PDFE.pdf page 89. - 777 - 14. As the use of the Internet and other new technologies increase, - more criminals are provided with opportunities to commit crimes remotely, - via telephone lines and data networks. Presently, malicious programming - code and harmful communications (such as child pornography) may pass - through several carriers located in different countries. And - infrastructures such as banking and finance increasingly are becoming - networked and thereby vulnerable to cyber-attack from distant locations. - We convene today to provide additional personal attention to and - direction for our joint action against this transnational criminality. If the ITU gets registry status I think it wil not be long before their Cybercrime legislation proposals will state that the only safe adres space is ITU adres space. This because a country can subject that adres space to their own laws. Now excuse me a minute while I fold my tin foil hat. -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: members-discuss-admin at ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-admin at ripe.net] Namens Arjan van der Oest Verzonden: maandag 1 maart 2010 15:24 Aan: Andy Davidson; members-discuss at ripe.net; nanog at nanog.org Onderwerp: RE: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group Andy scribbled: >>>> Competition is not a bad thing. >>> Competition would be if I could approach the NCC or Pepsi Cola for my >>> integers for use on the internet. It is not competition if the >>> government makes me ask them for some integers. >> Assuming that ITU would become a nationwide alternative RIR, you still >> have the choice to approach NCC, wouldn't you? > >Why would this automatically be the case ? If governments were required >to distribute addresses via the national regulator, then the freedom of >choice would NOT be the case. True. Like I said in my initial reply to members-discuss (and while playing a devil's advocate role), I'm not entirely sure what it is that ITU is striving for : replacing IANA or just becoming a nationwide RIR. In the latter case this would not automatically mean (also assuming that local governments will not further interfere in this process) that ITU would be your one and only one-stop-shop for integers. But anyhow, don't get me wrong. I agree with all that has been said on why and how ITU is trying to get a grip on packet switched communication networks. My only point it that it might not be a bad idea to ponder on the subject of allowing competition between RIR's in the same geographical aerea and hence allow ITU to achieve the status of nationwide RIR. If Telco's want to request their IP's from ITU instead of RIPE, they have my utterly blessings... *zipping my Dr. Pepper* -- Met vriendelijke groet / Kind Regards, Worldmax Operations B.V. Arjan van der Oest Network Design Engineer T.: +31 (0) 88 001 7912 F.: +31 (0) 88 001 7902 M.: +31 (0) 6 10 62 58 46 E.: arjan.van.der.oest at worldmax.nl W.:www.worldmax.nl W.:www.aerea.nl GPG: https://keyserver.pgp.com/ (Key ID: 07286F78, fingerprint: 2E9F 3AE2 0A8B 7579 75A9 169F 5D9E 5312 0728 6F78) Internet communications are not secure; therefore, the integrity of this e-mail cannot be guaranteed following transmission on the Internet. This e-mail may contain confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and erase this e-mail. Use of this e-mail by any person other than the addressee is strictly forbidden. This e-mail is believed to be free of any virus that might adversely affect the addressee's computer system; however, no responsibility is accepted for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. All the preceding disclaimers also apply to any possible attachments to this e-mail. ---- If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss list, please log in to your LIR Portal account at: http://lirportal.ripe.net/ First click on General and then click on Edit. At the bottom of the Page you can add or remove addresses. ================================================================== ================================================================== Disclaimer Gemeente Alkmaar: Aan dit mailbericht kunnen geen rechten ontleend worden. No rights can be derived from the contents of this E-mail message. ================================================================== ---- If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss list, please log in to your LIR Portal account at: http://lirportal.ripe.net/ First click on General and then click on Edit. At the bottom of the Page you can add or remove addresses.
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]