On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:52 PM 4/23/2007, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
I do not want any particular gov't (US or otherwise) to be "in charge" of the Internet any more than the next person. And good thing too, because it simply cannot happen, political pipe-dreams not withstanding.
But what has that got to do with the DHS promoting an idea to sign IP space allocations and/or annoucements? The idea in-and-of-itself doesn't sound wholly unreasonable. (I am not advocating this, just saying the idea shouldn't be rejected without consideration simply because the DHS said it.)
The question is who would do the signing and revocations. Whoever does that would indeed have a great amount of control over the internet. A single government agency should not have that sort of power to make a (for lack of better term), "no surf list" of IP space...
I think the strawman proposals so far were something like: 1) iana has 'root' ca-cert 2) iana signs down certs for RIR's 3) RIR's sign down certs for LIR's 4) LIR's sign down certs for 'users' (where 'users' is probably address-space users, like corporations or end-sites) This seemed not-too-insane, and would give ISP/operator type folks that ability to easily and quickly verify that: 157.242.0.0/16 is in point of fact permitted to originate by the org-id: LMU-1 with some level of authority... It's nothing really more than that. -Chris (who did spend some conference-room time with patrick/woody/doug/others talking about this very problem)