<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7654.12"> <TITLE>RE: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY>  See interspersed text -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss-admin@ripe.net on behalf of Arjan van der Oest Sent: Mon 1-3-2010 16:42 >> 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... > I wonder who those ITU members are then? Are those all currently > non-internet-offering telco's? Well, at least not the European telco's, see <A HREF="http://www.ripe.net/info/internet-management/etno-ipv6-200501.html">http://www.ripe.net/info/internet-management/etno-ipv6-200501.html</A> > ...a per-country specific prefix is not > necessarily a bad thing and may even have an upside. OK, I'd really like to know the upside then. And why wouldn't the current system be able to provide this ? >> 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. > Now that is a very smart thing to say. Another reason for the UN to gain > total control... Go on, hand them more sticks. I'm totally with you on that one. Threats are counterproductive. >> (considering the fact that governments themselves are not capable of >> running anything but a gray-cheese-with-a-dial telephone network > Hm, I was under the impression that ARPANET was a government run > network... Governments themselves don't need or want to run a network. They want operators that do that for them according to their rules. I'm sure there are operators that would be happy to oblige. As for now and asked earlier what benefit could the ITU as internet registry bring us ? The negative sides I see are: -more complex routing because of decreased aggregation (beaten to death already) -if the ITU wants to make policies for their address space and publishes them the same way as their standards they will not be openly and freely available. -if the ITU wants to make policies for their address space, operators need to do extra investments and effort to provide for two, possibly contradicting, policy frameworks. =================================================== Disclaimer Gemeente Alkmaar: Aan dit mailbericht kunnen geen rechten ontleend worden. No rights can be derived from the contents of this E-mail message. ===================================================</BODY> </HTML>