> On Sep 13, 2021, at 11:03 , Joe Maimon <jmai...@chl.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML wrote:
>> This ignores some of the real consumer-afflicting issues in the situation
>> and the key point I was trying to make…
>>
>> 1. The ATSC mandate was one of the most successful in USG History.
>>
> The most salient difference is that the USG own the airwaves and regulates
> them. I dont think we quite want the same for the internet.
>
> That is the only lesson to be learned.
>
> Joe
I am convinced that they regulate them.
I am not convinced that they own them.
However, I can see several situations where USG could exert legitimate
pressure. I’m not sure that they should, necessarily, but I am
not completely convinced that they should not, either. Note that nothing I
propose below represents an area where the USG does
not already regulate the matter in question to some extent or other.
+ Do not buy network products from vendors that do not offer
fully IPv6 enabled services.
+ Do not buy from suppliers whose web sites are not reachable
from an IPv6-only network after <date>
+ Require providers to offer IPv6 services to call their service
offering “Internet”.
+ Require providers to offer IPv6 services at X Mbps to call
their service offering “broadband internet”.
+ Require providers to offer IPv6 services in order to receive
any USF or other subsidies.
These would be pretty low hanging fruit and would be difficult to call
“overreach” as each of them is already much more intrusively
regulated for other purposes by USG.
Owen
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
