[ppml] [arin-discuss] /29 limit for ARIN SWIP whois
tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Jan 9 14:11:34 EST 2008
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>michael.dillon at bt.com
>Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:44 AM
>To: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] [arin-discuss] /29 limit for ARIN SWIP whois
>Police funding is out of scope for ARIN. As for credentials,
>you seem to be making fun of the idea of a special IP police
>force. Don't you realize that this is the state of affairs
>today? There is a special, self-appointed vigilante IP
>police force which uses various forms of intimidation as
>a regular part of their arsenal. These IP police have no
>credentials and are not regulated by anyone at all.
I understand this is the way it is today. There is a very
good reason for it being this way. (well, very bad reason
from one point of view) And it is not going to change
>If we shift to a model where the responsibility for
>responding to "bad actors" lies with the ISP from whose
>address space the abuse originates from, then we will
>end up with a model where real-life law enforcement,
>and normal commercial contract-law, cleans up the bad actors.
I would suggest you do some research on how effective the
United Nations Security Council is in "cleaning up" bad
actors like North Korea.
We don't have an Internet police force because the Internet
is global, and we do not have a global police force.
If you can figure out a way to get the world's governments
to all agree on setting up a single world police force,
then this issue will be solved.
Until the, the "vigilanties" on the Internet work exactly
like the "vigilanties" of the world, such as the United States
(Iraq invasion) Israel, US, Russia (kidnapping of people they
don't like in other countries) Iran (killing of people they
don't like in other countries) etc. etc. etc.
More information about the ARIN-PPML