[ppml] Re: [arin-announce] NRO Response to ITU Comments on the Management of Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Tue Nov 16 14:22:05 EST 2004


A small correction:

In any address space, there are only 2 /1s.  I think you meant a /8.
I would propose that allocating a v6 /24 to each country might not be
a bad idea.  A /8 or /9 would not leave much room for non-country
allocations.

Owen


--On Tuesday, November 16, 2004 10:46 AM -0500 "da Silva, Ron" 
<rdasilva at va.rr.com> wrote:

> Some general observations:
>
> This document makes an admirable argument for asserting control over
> internet governance by the UN by way of the ITU.  To summarize Mr. Zhao,
>
> "In my opinion, it is very important to recognize that the success of
> any ICT technology, and of the Internet in particular, depends on the
> collaboration of all parties, and in particular of governments..."
>
> The solution requires
> "..intergovernmental...policies...transposed...into national laws and
> [applied] to private companies..."
>
> By reading those two paragraphs, you can save yourself the trouble of
> reading the entire document (which is interesting nonetheless).
> Specifically regarding RIR's though it states in Section 4.2.b,
>
> "...despite [RIR's] best efforts, and even though a very large portion
> of the IPv4 space has not been assigned, some believe that there is a
> shortage of IPv4 addresses and voice concerns regarding the principles
> and managements of the current system. Some developing countries have
> raised issues regarding IP address allocation..."
>
> I would argue that the endorsement by the existing RIR's of the emerging
> AfriNIC is a clear counter example.  Should there be some additional
> outreach by the RIR's to governments within their regions to further
> encourage participation in the public policy process by companies or
> agencies from developing countries?
>
> "... my idea to reserve a block of IPv6 addresses for allocation by
> authorities of countries, that is, assigning a block to a country at no
> cost, and letting the country itself manage this kind of address in
> IPv6..."
>
> So we should give each ITU/UN recognized government a /1 be done with
> it?  How many ITU/UN recognized governments are there?  If there are
> more than 256, change that to a /2?  (I think there are only 189 member
> states, so the /1 would work just fine...with some space reserved for a
> limited number of new states being recognized.)
>
> -ron
>
> PS: Anyone have any pointers to details of the ITU's Next Generation
> Network (NGN) referenced in this document?



-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20041116/745eefac/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list