[members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group

Skeeve wrote:

> Are you really serious about that?  The issues seem to me much bigger than
> competition though.

Yes sir, in theory/conceptually.

> The ITU - being an RIR wouldn't satisfy what it seems to setting out trying to
> do.  Making them an RIR under the current system seems pointless as they aren't
> giving off much of a 'team player' vibe... more a fanatical religious
> vibe..  They will just define their own policies - which in the end may have an
> actual realised negative impact on the routing system - the details of which are
> for a different discussion.

Again: as long as they don't interfere with IANA and RIR's and assuming there is no aluminum hat conspiracy that tries to achieve world-domination-via-ipv6 I wish them all the best. If they wish to implement some ridiculous policies concerning the assignment of IPv6 space via the ITU, let them. The result will be that all the telco's and ISP's will continue to use the current RIR's and ITU will prove their existence is useless.

> Given that the ITU, like the RIR, are a member driven system.... that to me
> suggests that there are specific members who are pushing for this... I've heard
> 'Syria' being tossed around as an agitator in this... but that there are other
> supporters who are not happy with the US Government dominance/control of the
> process.

Which I can imagine, without the urge to start a political discussion here :)


> But the RIR system has been running for a long time... and 'not badly' for the 
> most part.... so why do we really need to change anything? 

Why are people so scared of change? It's not a bad thing... 

> Really.. if there were MASSIVE problems with the RIR system, the members would
> have kicked some ass a long time ago.

Imho there is no massive problem with the RIR system, although there is always room for improvement.

Again, my only point is: allocating space to ITU may settle whatever worries they have. I'm just trying to point out that competition (and change) are not a bad thing and I'm reluctant to start seeking conspiracies about world domination via ipv6. Let's see what it is ITU is *really* trying to get done, let's chat about it and then let's see what is wise.

With all respect to Sven Kamphuis, that is exactly the reaction I would not see as the best towards the UN and ITU.

Just my 2 cents

-- 
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.