[1559] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hank Nussbacher)
Fri Jan 26 09:25:36 1996
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 16:08:27 IST
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK@taunivm.tau.ac.il>
To: Peter Galbavy <peter@demon.net>, Tim Bass <nanog@dune.silkroad.com>
cc: smd@sprint.net, Daniel.Karrenberg@ripe.net, nanog@merit.edu,
forrestc@imach.com, cidrd@iepg.org, iab@isi.edu, iesg@isi.edu,
iana@isi.edu, local-ir@ripe.net, tli@cisco.com, bass@dune.silkroad.com
In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 26 Jan 1996 11:17:43 +0000 (GMT) from
<peter@demon.net>
On Fri, 26 Jan 1996 11:17:43 +0000 (GMT) you said:
>I cannot accept that we have to >beg< RIPE like a good little provider
>for address space that should be allocated to us from the USA anyway.
>I will be interested to see how the RIPE actually works (and not just
>listening to Daniel dictate policy by e-mail) when I go to my first RIPE
>meeting next week. So far it seems like a bureaucracy that is entirely
>self perpetuating and self interested without consider what the people
>who pay for its very existance want. sigh. Just like an unelected
>government in fact.
ILAN pays RIPE and I do think that RIPE listens. If you compare
RIPE to Internic, I think they are way ahead in the way of
user representation. Your comments are more appropriate for
Internic, IMHO. I have followed RIPE's development for the past 5
years and I will honestly say that I am glad that RIPE is what it is
and that we are not in the sphere of Internic.
>Peter Galbavy peter@demon.net
Hank Nussbacher
