RE: Internic address allocation policy
On Monday, November 18, 1996 2:28 PM, Michael Dillon[SMTP:michael@memra.com] wrote: @ On Mon, 18 Nov 1996, George Herbert wrote: @ @ > This should not be happening. Matthew should not have to fly out @ > to Virginia to tell someone at InterNIC face to face what he's been @ > saying in email. @ @ I agree. But this is business and businesses are based on personal @ relationships with key suppliers and customers. The Internic IP registry @ is a key supplier for any large ISP and that means if they have not @ developped a relationship with the IP registry people during their early @ days, they will run into this sort of problem when they need the IP @ registry's help. @ Hmmm...develop a relationship...are people getting married ? or just trying to get a government clerk to assign some numbers ? If people are going to develop a relationship, maybe they should be attending meetings like the following that was reported in the October 1996 Internet Monthly Report. Of course to do that, they would have to be notified. You should note that no notes or minutes are included, just the following brief mention. @@@@ ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/imr/imr9610.txt IP Support Kim Hubbard met with Jon Postel (IANA), David Conrad (APNIC) and Daniel Karrenberg (RIPE) in California to discuss IP issues. @@@@@@ Anyone that has not figured out by now that the Internet is a country club like place where you have the "haves" and the "have nots", and the "right people" and the "wrong people" and people with relationships and those without, then you have not looked very closely at the system. One would hope that the "system" had been designed to accommodate an expanding number of people helping to provide the infrastructure and the commitments needed to protect some of the precious natural resources of the Internet. In my opinion, the technical system *has* been designed this way, but the *people* system has not. What we now see evolving is a system which does not protect the natural resources of the Internet but instead operates to protect the "people resources" of the Internet. Rather than focusing on the "relationships" of routers and networks, and routing tables and IP allocations, we are focusing on relationships of people. Actually, the people do not probably matter as much as the money they represent. More and more people are suggesting that non-Internet meetings be used to solve problems. More and more, people are talking about jet setting around the world to participate in forums. Why ? Because only those people with the money can participate. The barrier to entry is being raised to make sure that only the "right" people get in. The Internet is not being used effectively by the people who are designing systems to "exclude" people, rather than "include" them. I predict that all of this will lead to a new generation of teachers, students, inventors, citizens, and government officials building a true Internet using the current network as a base. People are not going to continue to tolerate being oppressed by these policies and systems which are designed to favor a small elite group of people at the expense of the performance of the network. The focus needs to shift back to the relationships of natural Internet resources and the fragile eco-system that is required to keep things working. -- Jim Fleming UNETY Systems, Inc. Naperville, IL e-mail: JimFleming@unety.net JimFleming@unety.net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)
On Mon, 18 Nov 1996, Jim Fleming wrote:
@ relationships with key suppliers and customers. The Internic IP registry @ is a key supplier for any large ISP and that means if they have not @ developped a relationship with the IP registry people during their early @ days, they will run into this sort of problem when they need the IP @ registry's help.
Hmmm...develop a relationship...are people getting married ?
Yes. In order to succeed in business you must develop relationships with key suppliers that are much like marriage relationships.
or just trying to get a government clerk to assign some numbers ?
Government clerks are not involved here.
Anyone that has not figured out by now that the Internet is a country club like place where you have the "haves" and the "have nots", and the "right people" and the "wrong people" and people with relationships and those without, then you have not looked very closely at the system.
That's the way the world works. Why should the Internet be different? I'd rather deal with real people, warts* and all, than deal with cold faceless government bureacracies.
One would hope that the "system" had been designed to accommodate an expanding number of people helping to provide the infrastructure and the commitments needed to protect some of the precious natural resources of the Internet. In my opinion, the technical system *has* been designed this way, but the *people* system has not.
We all know that nobody predicted such a long run of exponential growth and that nobody has been prepared to handle this kind of growth. All we can do is to try our best and not give up too easily.
What we now see evolving is a system which does not protect the natural resources of the Internet but instead operates to protect the "people resources" of the Internet.
And what use is an Internet without the people?
Actually, the people do not probably matter as much as the money they represent.
You're too damn cynical, Jim.
More and more people are suggesting that non-Internet meetings be used to solve problems.
That's right. It does people good to get their heads out of the cyberclouds, their feet planted firmly on the ground and their hands clasped in somebody else's with a smile on the face. This is how you get things done in the REAL WORLD.
forums. Why ? Because only those people with the money can participate. The barrier to entry is being raised to make sure that only the "right" people get in.
These barriers have always existed. Anyone who really needs to go someplace can find the money although it often involves REAL WORK. But that's the REAL WORLD for you....
I predict that all of this will lead to a new generation of teachers, students, inventors, citizens, and government officials building a true Internet using the current network as a base.
Bah, humbug! I've seen the Internet these kind of people try to create. They call them FREE-nets and then tangle everyone up in petty politics, power struggles and mindless sniping. Instead of bringing people together, they divide people between the commercial providers (with 95% market share) and the community networks (with 5% market share) all the while claiming that they are great because they have brought the power of the Internet into the community. Internet access in North America costs less than a month's supply of cigarettes. How many poor people can't afford cigarettes? Not many.
People are not going to continue to tolerate being oppressed by these policies and systems which are designed to favor a small elite group of people at the expense of the performance of the network.
Great description of the would-be elites who created the freenets and community networks of the world. Michael Dillon - ISP & Internet Consulting Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-604-546-3049 http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael@memra.com
participants (2)
-
Jim Fleming
-
Michael Dillon