Please send comments...
At 01:42 PM 2/27/97 -0600, Jim Fleming wrote:
>On Thursday, February 27, 1997 1:48 PM, Justin W.
Newton[SMTP:justin at erols.com] wrote:
>I suggest learning from the good and the bad of the InterNIC.
Who is opposing this? I believe that the entire ARIN proposal is based on
learning from what was done properly and improperly at the internic.
>That is a business issue and people people who spend
>all day configuring routers may not be involved in that
>aspect of this industry.
You'd be amazed what spending a decade or so of reading the Wall Street
Journal will do for you :)
>@ When they allocate that /8 do they get another one, or is it a once and
>@ done opportunity?
>I would assume the registry would have an active reclamation
>and reuse program. Something the InterNIC has not yet emphasized.
This would be interesting. Would you only be able to reclaim space from
your own /8, or from the /8's of others as well? I.e. registries which
allocated IP space to stable, growing organizations would be out of
business aside from recurring fees, while those who are allocating to some
of the more fly by night businesses will be able to recycle their space
>Beyond that, there are only so many /8 spaces in IPv4.
Agreed, who is going to reclaim space from registries who are not
allocating it properly or who are hoarding it to create a shortage?
>You do not need 49 day one...some states will be fast and some slower.
>California, Illinois, Washington, Michigan are ready to roll NOW...!!!
>Others will follow...
I don't seem to remember people from those states who are interested in
running a registry who /have/ been involved in the IETF working groups
which are trying to find solutions to IP based problems. I must have
missed someone. I'll go back over my NANOG and IETF attendee lists and see
if I can find them on there somewhere.
>@ >6. These 50 InterNICs then help to coordinate a world collection
>@ > of Root Name Server confederations to provide world-wide
>@ > stability to the entire Internet.
>@ Who coordinates this coordination? If these registries are competing, what
>@ incentive do they have to spend their time working together? We can go on
>@ and on.
>I have posted many notes on the "Round Table" approach.
What is going to be the incentive for the people running these registries
to sit down at the round table and be cooperative? I suppose one way we
could do so is to have the people running the registries be the same people
who are already sitting down at these types of round tables, but one might
say that then they were being kept from forming a registry and that the old
school is suppressing competition, etc etc. (I know, its hard to believe
that his might happen, but there are actually people out there who might
profess something like this).
>Yes, you can go on and on...I am not sure who "we" is...
Sorry, I use the term we very generically and often. Usually I don't have
a specific group in mind when I do use it. Apologies for the vagueries.
Erol's Internet Services
ISP/C Director at Large