[123141] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Arjan van der Oest)
Mon Mar 1 11:21:38 2010
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 17:21:11 +0100
In-reply-to: <044331CC-C797-4E21-AD6F-E3534AD0AB62@me.com>
From: "Arjan van der Oest" <arjan.van.der.oest@worldmax.nl>
To: "Skeeve Stevens" <skeeve@me.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, members-discuss@ripe.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
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=20
> most part.... so why do we really need to change anything?=20
Why are people so scared of change? It's not a bad thing...=20
> 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
--=20
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@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.
