[1529] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Yakov Rekhter)
Thu Jan 25 20:28:39 1996
To: miguel.sanz@rediris.es (Miguel A. Sanz. RedIRIS/CSIC)
cc: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>, smd@sprint.net,
Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg@ripe.net>, nanog@merit.edu,
forrestc@imach.com, cidrd@iepg.org, iab@isi.edu, iesg@isi.edu,
iana@isi.edu, Local Internet Registries in Europe <local-ir@ripe.net>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 26 Jan 96 00:45:46 +0100."
<9601260045.ZM16613@rediris.es>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 17:10:05 PST
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>
Miguel,
> > Would you assume that anyone whose address allocation follow
> > "the current address allocation policy of the IANA/InterNIC/RIPE NCC/AP-NIC"
> > is guaranteed 100% global Internet connectivity ?
> >
>
> No one can assume anything in this fast moving world, but at least I
> assume the last A of 'IANA' means 'Authority' and not 'Anarchy'.
IANA is the *Naming and Addressing* Authority. But to the
best of my knowledge the IANA's authority is not sufficient to
guarantee Internet-wide connectivity.
> If the aim is global connectivity there must be some common rules everybody
> should follow. If someone has problems with them he can try to convince the
> authority/community to change them, but in a civilized way, without trying
> to impose anything to the rest of the world.
What do you think should be covered by the "common rules everybody
should follow", and who should be setting these rules ?
Yakov.
