[123126] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Davidson)
Mon Mar 1 09:08:34 2010
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:07:41 +0000
From: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
To: members-discuss@ripe.net, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <FC5FF0B613540249959195342B6D034CC0381E@worldmax-sbs01.Worldmax.local>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 01/03/2010 14:04, Arjan van der Oest wrote:
> Andy wrote:
>>> 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.
> Not sure if Pepsi would be the right comparison for the ITU ;-)
My point entirely. :-)
Andy
