North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: follow-up IANA-RESERVED IRR
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, John M. Brown wrote: > I'm concerned with having "to much data" in the system. This invites > mistakes, potential abuse and other problems. > > By having only: > > RESERVED or ALLOCATED I'm ok with anything, as long as we try to move in the forward direction. BTW, IANA needs to remember to ALLOCATE addresses used by themselves. One problem with the current system is its difficult to tell when you have a squatter announcing a more specific block, or if it has really been allocated to them. Sean Doran demonstrated this many years ago. > and having that publishd by IANA, we reduce the potential of > mistakes affecting "real users". Actually we don't reduce the potential for mistakes. It just makes it easier to track down the culprits. > If the RIR's are going to provide more data, then they need to > upgrade their business and expense models to support live people > 7x24x365 so that mistakes are fixed QUICKLY. > > Just my own personal $.02 on the topic. > > I would suggest, crawl, walk, run with this idea. > > Lets first get IANA up and going, then see how well that works > and move forward if it makes sense and the appropriate protections > can be in place. Go for it. I've already submitted my recommendations on the new US national cyberprotection plan to the US Government. I don't know if they'll choose any of my ideas. I would much prefer to see a group of Internet engineers solve the problem. We've been talking about it since 1995. Instead the proposed technical solutions keep getting more and more complex to avoid dealing with the real problem. I think the actual solution is much simplier, but requires cooperation from at least the largest ISPs, RIRs and IANA. Yes, it requires more work, but its a lot less complex than some of the other ideas I've seen recently.