Please send comments...

[Jim Fleming]

On Thursday, February 27, 1997 1:48 PM, Justin W. Newton[SMTP:justin at erols.com] wrote:

<snip list dynamnics discussion that does not meet IETF Code of Conduct>

@ >
@ >Folks, there is a simple solution to many of these
@ >problems. This solution has been refined from months
@ >and months of debates. I welcome people's comments
@ >on this solution:
@ >
@ >1. Keep the InterNIC prototype in place until September 1998
@ >	when the U.S. Government's Cooperative Agreement
@ >	ends with AT&T and NSI who are the remaining two
@ >	companies that form what is called the InterNIC.
@ 
@ Am I to take this to mean that you are against splitting off IP allocation
@ to a non-profit org which has more direct input from the ISPs that it
@ serves?  Its a valid opinion, but if that is your opinion, it changes the
@ tone of some of your other postings (There is a difference between being
@ for something in theory, but against the actual implementation, and being
@ against the idea as a whole).
@ 

I suggest learning from the good and the bad of the InterNIC.
The U.S. Government and the NSF have spent an enormous
amount of the taxpayers time and money. I want to try to
recover some of that investment for the people.

That is a business issue and people people who spend
all day configuring routers may not be involved in that
aspect of this industry.

@ >
@ >2. Allow companies to clone the InterNIC with the following
@ >	Internet resources:
@ >		1. 3 Top Level Domain Names
@ >		2. One /8 IP Address Space
@ 
@ When they allocate that /8 do they get another one, or is it a once and
@ done opportunity?
@ 

I would assume the registry would have an active reclamation
and reuse program. Something the InterNIC has not yet emphasized.

Beyond that, there are only so many /8 spaces in IPv4.
Other spaces, such as the IPv8 space or the IPv6 space
will expand things.

First we have to work with what we have.

@ >
@ >3. Encourage this cloning via forty-nine $250,000 grants from the
@ >	National Science Foundation which would come
@ >	from the Internet Infrastructure fund which has over
@ >	$12,000,000 for this type of purpose.
@ 
@ Can you submit a list of 49 individuals other than those involved in ARIN
@ who are capable of running such a registry?  (From the IETF working groups
@ I have been involved with I do not believe that there is a pool much larger
@ than 49 people in the US who fully understand the issues involved, and most
@ of them would much rather be doing what they are doing now than run a
@ registry).
@ 

You do not need 49 day one...some states will be fast and some slower.
California, Illinois, Washington, Michigan are ready to roll NOW...!!!
Others will follow...

Oh...I forgot...Virginia is well taken care of...;-)
Coincidence I guess...

@ 
@ >6. These 50 InterNICs then help to coordinate a world collection
@ >	of Root Name Server confederations to provide world-wide
@ >	stability to the entire Internet.
@ 
@ Who coordinates this coordination?  If these registries are competing, what
@ incentive do they have to spend their time working together?  We can go on
@ and on.
@ 

I have posted many notes on the "Round Table" approach.

Yes, you can go on and on...I am not sure who "we" is...

--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

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