ARIN Comments

[Jim Fleming]

On Wednesday, February 26, 1997 9:18 PM, David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc at APNIC.NET] wrote:
@ Hi,
@ 
@ >I believe in creating a registry for each state. 
@ 
@ I'm curious.  What does US national political geography have to do
@ with IP address allocation?  Continental geography is bad enough.
@ Further, if you support a registry for each state, then I assume you
@ would support address allocation registries be created for each
@ province, prefecture, etc. in other countries.  But why stop there?
@ Why not go down to cities or communities or how about making every
@ post office on the planet a registry?
@ 
@ Oh, and how are these registries supposed to coordinate their
@ policies?
@ 
@ Thanks,
@ -drc
@ 
@ 

Mr. David Conrad
Director
Asia Pacific NIC (APNIC)


Dear David:

I am somewhat surprised that a person who makes part of their
living allocating IP addresses for a "geographic" region would
not understand the geo-political reasons why people like to
work with organizations that are in the areas that: speak their
language, understand their cultures, and are supportive of
their communities.

In answer to your question about coordinating policies. The
United States of America and its 50 states have had a long
history of being able to coordinate policies. I suggest that
you study that history for the answer to your question.

If these views are not consistent with the views that you have
seen as an attendee at meetings here in the U.S. with
the people proposing ARIN, please expand on that for this
ARIN discussion group.

--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)