On Tuesday, November 19, 1996 7:54 AM, Brian Tackett[SMTP:cym@acrux.net] wrote: @ <snip> @ @ @ So, my question is: What can we do to make it better? Not "What can Kim @ Hubbard do to fix it", and not "What can those stupid ISP's do to fix it", @ but what can both do collaboratively to work out a consistent method of @ doing things, and making sure that it's well known to both new existing @ providers of network solutions. @ I would suggest the following for starters... 1. ALL* proposed IP allocations (and transfers) should be published in a well-known public place and some public comment period should be set before the allocations are made. 2. More NICs should be created. The original NSF contracts called for General Atomics to be the NIC of NICs. This concept has been lost and most of the power is in the hands of a too few people. 3. ALL of the NICs should vote on whether the allocations should be made. The result of these votes should be recorded with the public information above. As the number of NICs is increased, via #2, then more voices will be heard. 4. Some sort of Board or approval body, drawn from Industry groups should be developed as an appeals body should the vote in #3 not go the way someone or some company prefers. This would be a last resort sort of step. 5. All meetings** between the NICs should be publicized and anyone should be allowed to attend. The meeting agenda should be readily available as well as the meeting notes. 6. A complete and detailed accounting with allocation percentages should be posted on a well-known public web site. This will allow everyone to see precisely where allocations stand in the IPv4 address space and what a small percentage of the space has been allocated to ISPs, while huge blocks are "reserved" for unknown purposes. 7. A complete review of /8 allocations should be done with a complete audit of how the companies that have those allocations are utilizing those blocks (as well as other blocks). The CEOs and shareholders of those companies should be informed that their past policies may not conform to modern standards of frugal allocations. 8. More emphasis should be placed on IP Address Ecology and people should be rewarded and/or awarded for their actions via public forums and peer support. * ALL means ALL - Even the private, behind the scenes, allocations made by the IANA, such as the @Home allocation which was not made based on SWIP information. How could it be? They did not even have customers, just a lot of venture capital and the "right" people on their staff. ** The people involved in the following meeting could start by documenting it. @@@@ 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. @@@@@@ -- Jim Fleming UNETY Systems, Inc. Naperville, IL e-mail: JimFleming@unety.net JimFleming@unety.net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)