On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 13:57 -0700, David Conrad wrote:
Tom,
On Jun 13, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Tom Vest wrote:
Perhaps Jay is like me, trying to highlight some possible consequences that the "governed" might wish to consider before consenting to go down this particular one-way street.
The point is, we've already gone down the one-way street. The question is whether or not we allow the RIRs to help drive or get run over.
The process of governing virtually free handouts from a resource pool and the regulation of trade in resources controlled by others are incompatible activities. 2007-08, unless it is backed by regulatory rules and means to enforce those, goes a long way towards reducing the NCC to nothing more than a rdns+whois-operator wrt IPv4. RIR's policies have so far been successful because good behaviour has been rewarded with ample supply of address-resources. Pointing fingers will not make a difference once we're out of carrots. I belive 2007-08 on its own is pointless. If there is a market there will also be someone trying to regulate it. If the RIRs want their policies to remain relevant they will have to play the game. For _example_: - Restrict buyers - Need based - No hoarding (first use what you have) - Require registered LIRs to filter disputed prefixes It will cost a lot of blood, sweat, tears and won't come cheap. The NCC may also end up having more lawyers than hostmasters, but regulation _is_ a completely different ballgame. OTOH, if we drop the ball, who do we expect to pick it up? //per