[ppml] Resurrecting ULA Central [was: Re: Policy Proposal 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal

[Peter Sherbin]

> Why is the (potential) ownership of IP addresses a Bad Thing?

It is practicality rather than good vs. evil. Ownership implies control. If owner
decides using 96 instead of 128-bits it impedes the system.

Peter

--- George Kuzmowycz <George.Kuzmowycz at aipso.com> wrote:

> David Williamson <dlw+arin at tellme.com> wrote on 04/25/2006 9:42:40 AM:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 08:12:10AM +0000,
> bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com 
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 04:27:06PM -0400, Jason Schiller
> (schiller at uu.net) 
> >> wrote:
> >> 	perhaps i was unclear.  the ULA proposal from the IETF
> >> 	create property rights in IP address space, a concept that
> >> 	to date, is antithical to the RIR premise that IP space
> >> 	is roughly analogous to frequencies... e.g. can I OWN
> >> 	the frequency band between 10.8GHz and 11.2Ghz and require
> >> 	anyone who uses it to pay me royalties on a global basis?
> > 
> > I haven't read the IETF proposal, but I'm hoping that we can simply
> > link this hypothetical internal infrastructure allocation to holding
> an
> > AS.  In that way, there's no ownership created, since you certainly
> > don't own an AS number.  The RIRs would still be the allocators of
> > space out of the global reserved block for this purpose:  they
> simply
> > provide stewardship of the chunk associated with the ASNs allocated
> to
> > them.
> > 
> > Sounds like I better go read the draft.  I agree that ownership
> rights
> > would be a problem
> 
> Why is the (potential) ownership of IP addresses a Bad Thing?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com