Gordon and all,
The short answer is: surely there is. And several ideas have been floated
that were not in a proposal format that MAY garner stakeholder/user
support. However they may NOT garner APNIC questionably legitimate
leadership. Hence the crux of RIR's policy development dilemma..
So is there a more effective proposal that can be crafted and
presented that would garner sufficient
support to be adopted?
Jeff Williams wrote:
GB, Joe and all,
Hi Jeff,First off, you welcome GB. Secondly, the carriers have been given
Thank you very much for publishing the additional information. The
3 week period I referred to was just that one example that I had at hand
and did not want to cite anything longer because I did not have a
concrete example, just in case I was asked to provide additional
documentation. I also wanted to give the carriers the "benefit of
doubt" that they try to do a reasonable job at table maintenance.
the benefit of the doubt far to long and have yet to belly up to the bar
for various reasons that may be very good ones to each carrier itself
form a business and investor return standpoint. However, regulation
that is thoughtful, enforceable and in as well as by the public interest
is, and has been needed for a number of years now.
In all honesty, I submitted the proposal to generate some thoughtNo problem IMHO is insurmountable IF any and all interested parties
within the community on the problem and possible solutions. I do
realize that the various local legalities (local to the ISPs and various
carriers) as well as the previously cited international and trade
concerns create a very difficult landscape for such a proposal as this
to have any traction at all, especially with the drastic economic impact
that it carries. Coupling the various legalities, trade, economic
realities together, you wind up with a nearly insurmountable problem,
especially for a proposal that is rather simple and drastic in nature.
are truly willing to first recognize the problem, can adequately identify
the aspects of the problem, and are willing to address the problem
Given all of this, I ask the community, how else other thanOur members answer is that there at this juncture and after all these
sanctions that carry drastic economic consequences will such large
carriers (as well as smaller ISPs) essentially be forced to police
years, none. The more relevant question might be: How can enforceable
global policies/regulations be developed that meet the current and perhaps
changing over time, needs of all of the interested and effected parties?
Has the servicing of dark space become a "cost of doingNo and to address such a problem is one that needs government and
business", and if so, what happens when it's growth creates a situation
that cannot be ignored?
the private sector regulated policy solutions that are again enforceable and
may carry serious financial or other penalties if violated or reported and
found in a short period for review, also enforced to the letter if so provided
for in such determined policies/regulations.
Does the community just legitimize the practiceOf course not! It would be unlikely presently to determine if the
and go forward?
community, depending on how one defines "The Community", if
such a practice has or is being legitimized...
SPAM traffic now consumes well over 60% of emailControlling IP space is not the problem, but controlling how IP
traffic. Will we have a "controlled" area of IP space that co-exists at
some level with "uncontrolled" space - an extension of what we have
space is utilized is...
What happens when a new allocation is made that takes awayLegal ownership is being claimed for Domain names now, even
someone's use of dark space that they have been "using" for a
substantial period of time. Will they claim legal ownership under
something similar to real estate's "Adverse Possession"?
TLD's are now owned due to ICANN's error in judgment. How
far away are we from ownership of IP addresses?
I would also like to ask something that I touched on before. HasWhy would they?
APNIC considered a test in that they would officially request that XYZ
(i.e., ATT, MSN, MCI, AOL, etc.) to return it's property (the
unallocated IP address space). Essentially, by routing a dark space
address, the service in question, is denying APNIC the control of it's
property that it needs back under it's control for authorized legal
allocation. A cease and desist order for lack of a better description.
It might be an interesting attempt. I would think that say ATT for
example, would have a difficult time denying APNIC's request to return
(stop routing a dark space address), when its own IP address allocation
has been derived from an RIR.
What recourse would APNIC have if such aCurrently APNIC could suggest other of it's "Customers"
request were either ignored or refused outright?
block all of ATT's IP's. Pretty weak...
Jeff Williams wrote:
GB and all,
ATT has been routing and utilizing dark address space for at least 3 years
that I can document, not mearly 3 weeks. Worldcom/con/MCI has been
doing so for longer than 4 years that I can document. AOL has been doing so
for longer than 6 years that I can document. And MSN has been doing so
for a little more than 4 years that I know of.
Hence I cannot in good faith, agree with your comment or opinion that
"Most if not all carriers, I believe attempt to perform a good job keeping
their tables current and clean."
I believe that Dr Batista, myself and others on other verious forums going
back at least 4 years have pointed this out to Worldcom/con/MCI as well
as ATT before.
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix dot netcom dot com
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827