j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
On 22/08/2011, at 3:48 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
I claimed "I believe we're now in the phase where the incumbent monopolies and their supporters attempt to actively discourage use of new disruptive entrants" and that I saw parallels with how PTT monopolies behaved in the past.
I for one read this as referring to the RIRs - it's hard to see what else it could refer to.
it could be interpreted at&t, comcast, dtag, verizon, ...
The RIRs are bottom-up policy organisations in their very nature. Whatever faults they have in their policies come largely because that process inherently reflects the foibles of the participating stakeholders, not from the arrogance of those in charge.
while i am less sanguine, i have been saying for years that having restrictive allocation policies based on routing table growth are, in fact, the incumbents restricting entry into the market because it would cost them money.
Ah, I now understand both your comments above. From my perspective, the sway that the incumbents have over RIR policy is much less than would be necessary if that were true - there are too few compared to the overall number of LIRs who engage in policy discussion. How would you feel about a slightly different statement - that because there are very few people outside of the LIR community engaged in policy discussion (or very few "consumer" LIRs if you wish), the LIR community overall acts like a single incumbent?