NAIPR Message

Multihoming sites and ARIN

On Thursday, February 20, 1997 5:18 PM, Yakov Rekhter[SMTP:yakov at CISCO.COM] wrote:
@ Scott,
@ 
@ > >On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, Scott Huddle wrote:
@ > >> I bid $2500 for a /19 anywhere in The Swamp.  Those holding /24s
@ > >> are encouraged to find their neighbors and put together a
@ > >> contiguous block.  
@ > >
@ > >Heck, I'd bid $5000 for the same, and consider it a standing offer.
@ > 
@ > Observation 1, if there were a market for address space, there is 
@ > money to pay for renumbering.  (i.e., I'll pay you $Y for your
@ > two discontiguous /18s and give you a /19 in new space.)
@ > 
@ > Observation 2, the job of a registry in a market scheme becomes
@ > more one of recording "trusteeship" rather than setting policy 
@ > of distribution.  
@ > 
@ > Observation 3, $5001. :) 
@ 
@ Somewhat controversial:
@ 
@ Observation 4: the decision on whether there should be a market
@ for address space should  be controlled *neither* by registries,
@ *nor* by various I* organizations (IETF, ISOC, IAB, IESG).
@ 
@ Yakov.
@ 
@ 

I agree...

The United States of America is a great nation that has been one of the
primary leaders in the development of information technology. The Internet
is largely derived from government funded projects and without the security,
stability, and staying power of the U.S. Government, the large number of
Internet users around the world would not be jumping on board the Information
Superhighway.

Many people and companies have placed trust in the U.S. Government. The
U.S. Government places trust in God. (According to the back of a one dollar bill).
Despite the fact that many people on the Internet place trust in the IANA, the
IETF, the IAHC, the IAB, the IESG and other I* organizations, the fact remains
that the U.S. Government backs the Internet. (and the U.S. dollar)

Within the U.S. Government various agencies and organizations have helped
to move the Internet forward and to provide the representative government
needed on the Internet for people to safely make investments in time and
money with the knowledge that a democractic and capitalistic group of
people are in control. One of the primary agencies helping to fund the
Internet has been the U.S. Government funded National Science Foundation
(NSF). <http://www.nsf.gov>

The NSF has been the primary agency helping to fund and provide the clout
for the cooperative acitivity commonly called the InterNIC. The InterNIC was
originally made up of three companies, General Atomics, AT&T, and Network
Solutions, Inc. These three companies were supposed to work together in
various capacities to provide a variety of services including the important
clerical duties commonly called "registrations".

In the original plan, General Atomics was supposed to be the NIC of NICs
and coordinate the activities of the other two companies. The NSF was
supposed to oversee the entire activity. If managed properly, many NICs
would have been developed through education programs and the Internet
Infrastructure would have been expanded beyond the State of Virginia
and the few companies originally contracted to be part of the cooperative
agreement. That has not occurred.

The history of the evolution of the InterNIC has been well-documented
and is very clear. In their original proposal to the NSF, Network Solutions, Inc.
suggested that they should do the entire job. Jon Postel and Joyce Reynolds
of the IANA, are listed on the original Network Solutions, Inc. bid as
subcontractors to Network Solutions, Inc. As history has shown, the IANA,
working in conjunction with the "InterNIC" (Network Solutions, Inc.) has
helped to continue to promote Network Solutions, Inc. to a point where
most people consider NSI to be the InterNIC.

Throughout the evolution of the InterNIC from a three-company cooperative
to a one company monopoly, the NSF has apparently been caught like a deer
in the headlights of a car, frozen in indecision but providing mass when
needed to allow a few individuals and companies to leverage themselves
into positions of great wealth. The NSF has been skillfully used to provide
the U.S. Government seal of approval, while policies are enacted by private
parties who openly claim that the NSF is "backing" their agendas.

Many companies operating within the United States under Federal and
State laws, have been shocked over the past few years at how their tax
dollars are used to fund the NSF which in turn funds Internet infrastructure
with apparently no control over the outcome. Furthermore, despite repeated
efforts by other companies to participate in and make investments in the
Internet infrastructure, the NSF has stood by and allowed plans and systems
to be developed which lock certain companies out while others are given
a free pass and in some cases millions of dollars to jump start their business.

The recent IAHC <http://www.iahc.org> activity is an excellent example
of how a private company (ISOC) <http://www.isoc.org>, with less members
than many ISPs, is provided an NSF representative, Dr. George Strawn,
<http://www.cise.nsf.gov/ncri/Georgehome.html> for credibility, while they
develop a plan to sell what amounts to Internet Domain Registration
Franchises to companies willing to pay large fees to fund the private ISOC.

Another example is the recently proposed ARIN <http://www.arin.net>
organization which claims to have strong support from the NSF to charge
fees for IP addresses. The proposed Board of Direcors of ARIN are mostly
people funded directly, or indirectly, by the National Science Foundation.
<http://www.arin.net/arin_board.html>

@@@@@ <http://www.arin.net/arin_faq.html>  @@@@@@@@@
"Network Solutions is leading the ARIN proposal based on a mandate from
the Internet community reached in rough consensus with strong support
from the National Science Foundation and the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA)."
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Fortunately, the U.S. Government had the wisdom to set up an agency
within the NSF to provide some of the checks and balances needed to
regulate the NSF. That agency is the Office of Inspector General (OIG)
<http://www.nsf.gov/oig/oig.htm>. OIG is headed by the Inspector General
(IG), who reports directly to the President (via the NSB) and to Congress.

---- Inspector General -------

name: Sundro, Linda G.
email: lsundro at nsf.gov
directorate: Office of Inspector General
phone: (703)306-2100
office_phone: (703)
fax: (703)306-0649
address: 4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 1135S
: Arlington, VA  22230

--------------------------------------

In a recent discussion with Ms. Sundro, she indicated that the NSF
Office of Inspector General has been investigating the matters surrounding
the InterNIC and a Report to the Deputy Director is about to be published.
Ms. Sundro indicated that Ms. Clara Kuehn, a physicist AND ATTORNEY,
has been assigned to handle the investigations and can provide information
on the status of the report. 

--------------------------------------

name: Kuehn, Clara
email: ckuehn at nsf.gov
directorate: Office of Inspector General
phone: (703)306-2001
office_phone: (703)306-2001 x 1505
fax: (703)306-0649
address: 4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 1135S
: Arlington, VA  22230

------------------------------------------

Ms. Sundro also noted that the e-mail address (oig at nsf.gov) listed on
the Office of Inspector General web site as an "Electonic Mail Hotline"
is not useful in contacting her office. She indicated that Ms. Kuehn will
welcome input from people on all topics related to these matters and
that the above e-mail address (ckuehn at nsf.gov) should be used.

In summary, I think that U.S. citizens should be proud that their
great country developed much of the technology and infrastructure
for the Internet. I also think that the world population should be aware
that the hundreds of years of government development in the U.S.
has resulted in a system that has the proper agencies to not only
help to foster increased growth of the Internet but also to help
ensure that citizens around the world are able to compete in this
marvelous advancement on a playing field that is fair and level.

--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)