April 2014 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post
by Larry Sheldon 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

On 4/24/2014 11:01 PM, Everton Marques wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick(a)ianai.net>wrote: > >> On Apr 24, 2014, at 23:38 , Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon(a)cox.net> wrote: >>> >>> Regulating monopolies protects monopolies from competition. >>> >>> Monopolies can not persist without regulation. >> >> You are confused. >> > > I think Mr. Sheldon is pointing out this: Thank you. [more comment below] > --xx-- > The biggest myth of all in this regard is the notion that telephone service > is a natural monopoly. Economists have taught generations of students that > telephone service is a "classic" example of market failure and that > government regulation in the "public interest" was necessary. But as Adam > D. Thierer recently proved, there is nothing at all "natural" about the > telephone monopoly enjoyed by AT&T for so many decades; it was purely a > creation of government intervention. > > Once AT&T's initial patents expired in 1893, dozens of competitors sprung > up. "By the end of 1894 over 80 new independent competitors had already > grabbed 5 percent of total market share â€¦ after the turn of the century, > over 3,000 competitors existed.[55] <http://mises.org/daily/5266/#note55> In > some states there were over 200 telephone companies operating > simultaneously. By 1907, AT&T's competitors had captured 51 percent of the > telephone market and prices were being driven sharply down by the > competition. Moreover, there was no evidence of economies of scale, and > entry barriers were obviously almost nonexistent, contrary to the standard > account of the theory of natural monopoly as applied to the telephone > industry. > (...) > The theory of natural monopoly is an economic fiction. No such thing as a > "natural" monopoly has ever existed. The history of the so-called public > utility concept is that the late 19th and early 20th century "utilities" > competed vigorously and, like all other industries, they did not like > competition. They first secured government-sanctioned monopolies, and > *then,* with the help of a few influential economists, constructed an *ex* > *post* rationalization for their monopoly power. > --xx-- > The Myth of Natural Monopoly > http://mises.org/daily/5266/ I don't know what got me to thinking about it earlier today but I recalled when I started at the telephone company in Los Angeles there was a pitch made early on that in earlier days a business in Los Angeles had to have several telephones on desks to be able to talk to all of their customers. Which was true ONLY because regulation required that each telephone line terminate in an instrument owned by the providing company. Absent that one regulation, businesses would have invented multi-line instruments a lot earlier than was the case. There would still be some other problems like interchange traffic between companies, but I suspect that some entrepreneur would have (or maybe did) install two or more switchboards within lord reach of each other. (The high school I went to in the 1950s had a very complete non-Bell System telephone system on-campus. In a small office off the Main Office were two identical cord boards along with placards prohibiting connections between the two boards--which were ignored unless there was a telephone man in the office. -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)

3 2

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post
by Larry Sheldon 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

On 4/24/2014 11:37 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > The fact there are "regulated monopolies" does not mean regulation > cannot be used to keep a monopoly from forming. And using a turn of > phrase to prove a point of logic and/or history is a pretty sad > argument. Yeah, the phrase "regulated monopoly" exists, therefore > monopolies can't exist without regulation! Q.E.D. Oh, wait, got my > abbreviation wrong, I meant: W.T.F.? > > Larry is confused. He can claim he is not, but posting to NANOG does > not change the facts. Then again, just because I posted to NANOG > doesn't prove I'm right either. Worst of all, this thread is pretty > non-operational now. > > So believe as you please. I'm going to believe that the FCC allowing > monopolies (regulated or not) to charge content providers as they > please will be bad for me and about 300 million other Americans. > > Besides, what has this to do with my original questions? > -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)

1 0

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post
by Larry Sheldon 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

On 4/24/2014 10:44 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > On Apr 24, 2014, at 23:38 , Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon(a)cox.net> > wrote: >> On 4/24/2014 10:23 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >>> The invisible hand of the market cannot fix problems when there >>> is a monopoly. >>> >>> Put in economic terms, a player with Market Power is extracting >>> Rents. (Capitalization is intentional.) >>> >>> Regulating monopolies allows a market to work, not the opposite. >> >> Regulating monopolies protects monopolies from competition. >> >> Monopolies can not persist without regulation. > > You are confused. No. I am not. > Unless you are talking about "persist" on a time horizon spanning > generations. A monopoly can persist, as a maximum, as long as regulation protects it. Just look at the words! "Regulated Monopoly" has no definition without a monopoly. If so, then nothing can persist, with or without > regulation. And more importantly, I am not willing to wait that long > for a fix. "fix" is another monopoly preserver. >> A regulated monopoly is a monopoly, with all of the powers granted >> to monopolies by regulation. > > Regulations can work to ensure monopolies do not form. This is not > supposition, but historical fact. There is no case where regulation of monopolies prevented monopolies. The sentence doesn't even make any sense. If that were actually true, there couldn't be any "regulated monopolies" could there? > It is an open question whether our current regulator regime is > capable of repeating that feat, however. There are a number of cases in history where the absence of regulation has prevented monopolies. -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)

3 2

Re: Phase 4.
by Don Brearley 24 Apr '14

24 Apr '14

This thread pulled a good chuckle out of me... thanks guys :) Bryan, cheers. :) - Don >>> Warren Bailey 04/24/14 9:21 AM >>> Bryan is accepting bloody Mary donations this morning. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device -------- Original message -------- From: Jim Popovitch Date: 04/24/2014 6:30 AM (GMT-07:00) To: Clayton Zekelman Cc: nanog list Subject: Re: Phase 4. On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Clayton Zekelman wrote: > > Can someone please check the NANOG mailing list Universal Translator? I > think it is broken. I think you mean a NANOG liver is broken. -Jim P.

1 0

IPv4 Address transfer after company acquisition
by John Jackson 24 Apr '14

24 Apr '14

I have a customer who previously didn't have any IPv4 address space. They recently acquired a competitor that has a /24. Are there any special ARIN rules for this type of transfer? Any pointers, or 'gotchas'? Thanks John

4 3

Re: Phase 4.
by Clayton Zekelman 24 Apr '14

24 Apr '14

Can someone please check the NANOG mailing list Universal Translator? I think it is broken. At 01:54 AM 24/04/2014, Bryan Socha wrote: >Whats the big deal???? If your just arin, dont panic. Akamai and >digitalocean has been the only people aquire fair priced v4 putside >arin. So arin is ending. It doesnt stop anything. be smart 3 usd >per ip is fair if dirty. F the auct8ons they are fake and we get the ips >lower than op3ning. > >Icann is the mast 8 class as real? Distribute them >, --- Clayton Zekelman Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi) 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E Windsor, Ontario N8W 1H4 tel. 519-985-8410 fax. 519-985-8409

3 2

nanong list spam filtering
by Michael DeMan 24 Apr '14

24 Apr '14

Hi All, Sorry being a bit off-topic and having a boring subject, but we really should clean up whatever has been going on with so much spam hitting this mailing list. NO - I am complaining about people who post things I disagree with or on topics I have little interest in, I am tired of the stuff like... subject: Top rated...wireless security cameras--for both indoor & outdoor subject: Save on: Hawaii, vacation packages (classic) subject: Compare: the best, email marketing services subject: Cards reward plans\rates compared(MC-Capital1-Venture-ChaseFreedom-Citicard-BankAmericard-Discover-Visa) ...and what not. Has it always been the policy perhaps that this mailing list does no spam filtering whatsoever? If so that would be understandable. Meanwhile I think would be better for the community if at least some of the most egregious and obvious stuff did not have cpu and network cycles spent forwarding it onwards? As always, I could imagine that although I think this is simple it could be a politically charged debate. Cheers and please fix if possible, - Michael DeMan

2 2

ARIN Enters Phase Four of the IPv4 Countdown Plan
by John Curran 23 Apr '14

23 Apr '14

NANOGers - ARIN's regional IPv4 free pool has reached the equivalent of one /8 of IPv4 space, which means we are approaching runout of IPv4 space availability in this region. (See attached announcement from ARIN regarding occurrence of this event) There are some changes to processing of requests as we enter this final phase, and obviously service providers ought to be thinking about IPv6-based services, if not already in deployment. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN Begin forwarded message: From: ARIN <info(a)arin.net<mailto:info@arin.net>> Subject: [arin-announce] ARIN Enters Phase Four of the IPv4 Countdown Plan Date: April 23, 2014 at 10:00:20 AM GMT-3 To: arin-announce(a)arin.net<mailto:arin-announce@arin.net> ARIN is down to its final /8 of available space in its inventory and has moved into Phase Four of its IPv4 Countdown Plan. All IPv4 requests are now subject to Countdown Plan processes, so please review the following details carefully. All IPv4 requests will be processed on a "First in, First out" basis, and all requests of any size will be subject to team review, and requests for /15 or larger will require department director approval. ARIN's resource analysts will respond to tickets as they appear chronologically in the queue. Each ticket response is treated as an individual transaction, so the completion time of a single request may vary based on customer response times and the number of requests waiting in the queue. Because each correspondence will be processed in sequence, it is possible that response times may exceed our usual two-day turnaround. The hold period for returned, reclaimed, and revoked blocks is now reduced to 60 days. All returned, revoked, and reclaimed IPv4 address space will go back into the available pool when the 60 day period has expired. Staff will continue to check routing/filtering on space being reissued and will notify recipients if there are issues. When a request is approved, the recipient will have 60 days to complete payment and/or an RSA. On the 61st day, the address space will be released back to the available pool if payment and RSA are not completed. We encourage you to visit the IPv4 Countdown Phase Four page at: https://www.arin.net/resources/request/countdown_phase4.html ARIN may experience situations where it can no longer fulfill qualifying IPv4 requests due to a lack of inventory of the desired block size. At that time, the requester may opt to accept the largest available block size or they may ask to be placed on the Waiting List for Unmet Requests. Full details about this process are available at: https://www.arin.net/resources/request/waiting_list.html Please contact hostmaster(a)arin.net or our Help Desk +1.703.227.0660 if you have questions about these procedural changes. Regards, Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ ARIN-Announce You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Announce Mailing List (ARIN-announce(a)arin.net) Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce Please contact info(a)arin.net if you experience any issues.

5 5

Re: AOL Mail updates DMARC policy to 'reject'
by Larry Sheldon 23 Apr '14

23 Apr '14

On 4/23/2014 12:45 AM, Grant Ridder wrote: > Thought i would throw this out there. > http://postmaster-blog.aol.com/2014/04/22/aol-mail-updates-dmarc-policy-to-… Bet THAT will get Yahoo's attention! -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)

2 1

Someone with IP clue @Suddenlink please contact me
by Charles N. Wyble 22 Apr '14

22 Apr '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello all, Anyone from Suddenlink on this list? If so, please contact me unicast. I'm seeing some very significant issues originating in your network core and want to get them sorted out. The normal channels haven't been helpful. Yes I'm a downstream customer. Thanks! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTVwDvAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAtS7wQAJeK2dnSlelTM5uL7FiUHzxN bKIMXgGdcT4rbP1vvNnLH9kRTUQC7gTHAUbhCxaTjEhhNJKEzlsRR9b1d7nxCaKv 2m1knsb793CI/AbaRG0WUBxpXOvYoQicRMjht5ynoL5jSVzL+HmgMUF7LBdFBH8g 8MnS+3LVb1B120NvPobuzMGdcz4reg4L78MHJFUDVRWKp47u0adKpEacGHMcahz8 CJzECfD8Z7gQfLpup8kIpl/ZzxlQwvfdR4oUBSaaqVK0OBILE0TXZ5erqxn2zlCx 4KJMF8jhVNNs54KBSpXo+qCCcRCCZ663EVaSnSAzT6ODJwk+QpLua/NZXWstn2AS 9e8bMpa10yjbzlXSLYYjaAgvHeRUJ/CFm3pZR8iitYNUt8yU5Br38R3RZFKRFUBB ionEmuMU4XjdhYSJrtbZ+Ag2CDEOidOP7LXTt+Wf7GMeII+kE18LJX03QE1/cxxu ErWPaWDTb7fl4RkUcQ6E+QUSzR6ib+WCgFj7SZ41jm8HXr9U09FkXYTnU2AcJULn y0PI1/9x66kCi64mZE03qBC5nv+M/vaFT/w9y1kL8KJxXCkY/4Qz8tdilB2SsBvc R1gVDnyjWzNN0p7mqM4ZlruSPQlJyENzF8Zf/ksPM/DFY19bxE6pH4RKMmz6kpIf i4cU78SeVaa7ETXm7auO =lhNi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0