[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com]
>Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 3:47 PM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: David Conrad; Public Policy Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown
>
>
>
>This is where we disagree.  Networks who do what is in their own  
>short-term
>interest in a manner sufficiently contrary to the common good will  
>tend to
>find themselves without peers to connect them to the rest of the  
>internet.
>This has happened historically, and, it will happen in the future.   
>There is
>no need for a strong central authority, and your continued focus on  
>trying
>to scare us into needing one, among other things, convinces me that
>our existing rational anarchy is actually pretty robust.

We need one to manage the IPv4 to IPv6 conversion.  We will need one
to manage any IPv4 reclamation project, if one happens.  That does not
mean we will need one going forward from that.

Ever read about the RTC and S&L shutdown?  That is a perfect example
of a strong central authority that was called into being (and broke
a lot of rules by the way) and once it's job was completed, it
disappeared.

>
>What makes you think that any of their peers will accept this  
>advertisement
>for any significant period of time?  What makes you think that if  
>they repeat
>this type of abuse they will continue to have peers?

5 years ago I would have agreed with that.  I have seen too many 
technically stupid standards and whatnot, put into place because some
deep pocket wanted it, not because it was the right way to do things.
I am too cynical these days to expect that there's enough people who
would stand up to huge amounts of money and do the right thing.  If
the Internet were rife with honorable people do you think we would
have as much spam as we do?

Ted