Re : [ppml] on PPML? - was Re: How to get ...
Please stop this non sense debate here: Have you also come across the following address waist? I haven't seen you guys making any noise about them! 014/8 Jun 91 IANA - Public Data Network ---- (a whole /8 for an organisation of less than 20 people?) inet6num: 2001:07F8::/29 inet6num: 2001:07FD::/32 netname: K-rootserver-net-20030829 descr: This assignment given to k-root.server.net descr: maintained by the RIPE NCC --- (just for the Kroot server Infratsructure ????? is this an LIR) inet6num2001:0DC0::/32 netnameAPNIC-AP-V6-20030124 descrAPNIC Pty Ltd - Brisbane Offices + Servers descrLevel 1, 33 Park Rd descrPO Box 2131, Milton descrBrisbane, QLD. countryAU --- (just for APNIC??? an LIR?) So is your problem with AfriNIC or you are going to request IANA , RIPE NCC, APNIC too to send you their justifications? note that most of the v6 assignments/allocations above were made in 2003 where none of these RIR had IPv6 PI policy in place. IM. ----- Message d'origine ---- De : Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org> À : Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> Cc : ARIN Address Policy <ppml@arin.net> Envoyé le : Vendredi, 22 Juin 2007, 20h23mn 08s Objet : Re: [ppml] on PPML? - was Re: How to get ... Edward Lewis wrote:
At 16:44 +0100 6/22/07, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Global address consumption affects everybody globally. As such, if AfriNIC decides to waste address space, that affects all RIR's globally. As such it also affects ARIN, as such it affects you.
I guess I was too subtle in making my point.
Which point? Sorry, but not everybody is into prose, some people are engineers and simply want straight words.
If you are criticizing the activities of Afrinic, take it up discreetly with Afrinic. The "Court of Public Opinion" is not a place for a fair "fight."
It is a problem with AfriNIC that has an effect globally. It is not a fight, it is public questioning. If you want to ignore it, then ignore it.
I don't like the precedent of accusing an RIR of a misdoing and asking them to publicly defend themselves. The RIR's operate in a delicate balance of both openness in policy development and resource registration and confidentiality in handling and judging the worthiness of requests.
That openness is not there when a RIR makes up their own rules without asking their membership. Or did I miss the superinternal memo that is not supposed to be public in the first place?
Working in a environment of openness, confidentiality, and neutrality is difficult. You cannot defend yourself to the fullest because of the limits of what can be, what can not be, and what might otherwise be implied.
Plus this is the ARIN mailing list.
Stop thinking in your little American box. Or is the war in Iraq something that does not happen in the US and thus not relevant? To pull something in that also shows that local decisions have global effects.
Then please try to explain me why I saw this recently: 2001:42c8::/32 Canada TGB-V6-AFRICA
I believe that question is wholly inappropriate for this list. Especially for this list. (In the pulic meetings, our chair doesn't tolerate personal "accusations" either, something I was heartened to witness in April.)
If you try to say "Shut up" to me then either: - simply say on this list - simply say so by sending a private message And I am very sure that ARIN staff and other people are also very able to provide me with a similar message when needed very quickly. Please bring arguments along, they tend to help. I brought that up as a note to show you *WHY* it was appropriate to bring these matters up on the PPML mailinglist as policies and decisions happening in other regions *DO* affect ARIN. Let me repeat again, that I have NOTHING against that 2001:42c8::/32 assignment which is really a good thing and very well justified. It only demonstrates that Address Policy is a global thing, not something local. Organizations are global and the Internet is global. Policies and laws etc are not but they do affect us globally. And in case you don't like me mailing, then simply block all mail from jeroen@unfix.org, which is always nicely PGP signed, thus should be very easy to block in your MUA or even MTA. Greets, Jeroen _______________________________________________ This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML@arin.net). Manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail
Hi, On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 04:44:55PM +0000, Iwu Mbatelege wrote:
inet6num: 2001:07F8::/29 inet6num: 2001:07FD::/32
netname: K-rootserver-net-20030829
descr: This assignment given to k-root.server.net
descr: maintained by the RIPE NCC
--- (just for the Kroot server Infratsructure ????? is this an LIR)
There is a special policy for root DNS servers (given that, at that time, there was no other way to get them stable IPv6 addresses, and everybody agreed that it would be useful for the DNS root to have *fixed* addresses). In general, I would appreciate if discussions such as these would not be carried in parallel on *3* policy mailing lists - pick one, and discuss things there, but don't just cc: all of them. This being an AfriNIC policy matter, it belongs to the AfriNIC list, or the GLOBAL-V6 list, but I can't see a reason why this needs to be CC:'ed to the RIPE and ARIN policy lists. Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 113403 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
On 22 Jun 2007, at 6:44pm, Iwu Mbatelege wrote: [...]
Have you also come across the following address waist? I haven't seen you guys making any noise about them!
014/8 Jun 91 IANA - Public Data Network ---- (a whole /8 for an organisation of less than 20 people?)
I am actively reviewing this registry. Over the last few months I have had excellent support from a large number of people and have been able to remove most of the 1000+ assignments that were listed there. It is quite possible that the last 11 assignments are no longer actively used and can be returned. I am in contact with most of those organisations, confirming their status and hope to be able to update RFC 3330 as a result later this year. Regards, -- Leo Vegoda IANA Numbers Liaison
Iwu,
Have you also come across the following address waist? I haven't seen you guys making any noise about them!
014/8 Jun 91 IANA - Public Data Network ---- (a whole /8 for an organisation of less than 20 people?)
Actually, the PDN /8 was allocated for integrating X.25 networks into the Internet. Individual /32s were assigned to X.25 endpoints run by different companies, so representing 14/8 as "a whole /8 for an organization of less than 20 people" is not accurate. And besides, Leo Vegoda has been very active in recovering the /32s so we can return 14/8 to the free pool. There used to be over 200 assignments in that /8. There are lots of better examples in the "legacy /8" space, however I'm not sure "historical reasons" is a good rationale for current policy in an entirely different address space.
inet6num: 2001:07F8::/29 inet6num: 2001:07FD::/32 netname: K-rootserver-net-20030829 descr: This assignment given to k-root.server.net descr: maintained by the RIPE NCC
--- (just for the Kroot server Infratsructure ????? is this an LIR)
Because root name server addresses must be encoded into configurations of all caching servers on the Internet, I believe that they are very special and should be treated specially. Rgds, -drc
participants (4)
-
David Conrad -
Gert Doering -
Iwu Mbatelege -
Leo Vegoda