[76025] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: size of the routing table is a big deal, especially in IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Johnson)
Mon Nov 29 23:25:04 2004
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:24:42 -0600
From: "Joe Johnson" <jjohnson@jmdn.net>
To: "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>, <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
<Snip>
My preferred solution at this point is for the UN to take over=20
management of the entire Internet and for them to issue a policy of one=20
prefix per country. This will have all sorts of nasty downsides for=20
national providers and folks that care about optimal routing, but it's=20
the only way that I can see that will allow the Internet to continue to=20
operate over the long term.
Tony
</snip>
What happens to non-member states? What happens to Taiwan, who has not
been a part of the UN for decades? Does the island nation of Togo get a
prefix, but not Taiwan. Also, what about North Korea? Only South Korea
is a member state in the UN.
Next thing you know, they'll be trading prefixes for kick-backs . . .=20
