NAIPR Message

Invisible Hands, was Re: Multihoming sites and ARIN

On Saturday, February 22, 1997 9:50 AM, Michael Dillon[SMTP:michael at MEMRA.COM] wrote:
@ On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Jim Fleming wrote:
@ 
@ > The IPv4 address space is actually quite large. This nonsense
@ > about it being exhausted is bogus and promoted largely by people
@ > who are sitting on huge allocations.
@ 
@ Knowing your American-centric attitude, this statement does not surprise
@ me. But since the IPv4 address space is a global public resource and since
@ large parts of the world have only just started to deploy Internet
@ connectivity on the same scale as in the USA, your argument is bogus.
@ If the IPv4 address space was only for use in the USA, then it is probably
@ big enough. But when you look at the projected use of IPv4 addresses in
@ Europe, Asia, Australia, Africa and South America, it starts to look a 
@ LOT more constrained. And the best strategy we have to deal with potential
@ shortages of IPv4 addresses is to allocate frugally right now.
@ 

That is why IPv8 (and maybe IPv6) are on the horizon...:-)


@ > You have a voice....GO TO YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS...!!!!
@ 
@ You don't really want that Jim. Because if *I* go to *MY* elected
@ officials then all of this stuff ends up on the table at GATT negotiations
@ in Geneva. Believe me, neither you nor I want to see it end up like this.
@ 

Michael,

As you have pointed out, there is no Government organization
in Canada. I believe you have reported several times that they
are clueless.

If that is the case, then it would take years for the above to occur.
By that time the U.S. and any other participants will have moved
forward. The address space will be expanded and of course the
domain name space will be more diverse.

I find it interesting that you would issue cautions against the
above after supporting the IAHC with such vigor. What you
have described is close to the IAHC direction. I think it is
now very clear to ISPs in the U.S. that just because the
Internet is "international", international solutions do not
always work on a local level. This is especially true when
clueless international people try to set the policies.

In the U.S. we have a unique, short-term, problem. Many
people ASSUME the U.S. Government is watching out
for the consumers, taxpayers, businesses, etc. Elected
officials ASSUME the citizens know they are on their
own. The citizens are the losers. A few selected people
who are working these crossed assumptions to their
advantage are benefitting.

This would be like saying, consumers ASSUME that
meat is USDA approved. Elected officials ASSUME
consumers know this is not the case and let the
buyer beware is at play. As consumers get sick
people on both sides are asking questions.

Education is the key. Fortunately (or unfortunately)
the elected officials in the U.S. are coming up to
speed very quickly. I trust they will "do the right thing".
The rest of the world may follow their lead, or the
lead set by other groups. As I said before, my bets
are on the U.S. Government.

Think global and act local...for you that would be Canada.

--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

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