Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> and drive right into the bay over that bridge
> that your GPS insists exists.

My GPS has no knowledge of bridges.  I look out the window to see if there
are any obstacles.  I just follow drivable paths in the general direction of
the heading shown on my GPS until I arrive.  It is surprisingly efficient,
and I don't need any map at all.

> Where do you think your GPS gets its info?

>From satellites overhead.

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Bill Manning]

% 
% > Ever given a thought on the amount of effort explorers,
% > cartographrs, road builders, maintainers have put into
% > supplying you with the routing info you need to route
% > your car?
% 
% No.  I just set the coordinates in my GPS and follow the arrow.  No map
% required.
% 

and drive right into the bay over that bridge that your GPS insists
exists.  Where do you think your GPS gets its info?

-- 
--bill

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> Trying to dismiss a technical problem with a
> facile analogy that is not relevant is not a way
> to pursuade.

Logically, then, calling the analogy "stupid," or saying "we looked at it
and decided it wouldn't work," is even less so.

In any case, I have no objective to persuade.  I'm sure that all the
decisions have been made.  I'm confident that the passage of time will
provide all the persuasion needed.

> Roadways to not change topology dozens of times
> per second.

It depends on the time scale of observation.

> I could go on, but what is the point?

I agree.

> If you want to participate on a mailing list devoted
> to engineering of Internet protocols please don't
> expect to be listened to seriously unless you are
> prepared to conduct the discussion on a technical
> level.

There are certainly some people who probably should not listen to me, as it
will just raise their blood pressure.  However, there are also others who
are willing to listen to anyone, just as I am.  Those in the former category
can censor at their receiving end, so there is no reason to censor at the
sending end, particularly since it would be to the detriment of people in
the latter category.

Speaking of technical levels, what level does it require to change the
Reply-To address on a mailing list so that replies go to the group by
default, instead of to the sender of whatever message elicits a reply?

Re: Control by consent (Was Re: Any surprize at all?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> As a non-US person I get very concerned about lobby
> groups attempting to influence address space assignments.

Why?  The U.S. knows which moral standards are best for you, after all.

> If US based lobby organisations have an impact on
> number or naming assignments then it is nothing less
> that an attempt to coerce the rest of the world into
> North-American ldeals, morals and prejudices.

So what else is new?

> IANA and ICANN only have power through the consent
> of the other users of the Internet.

The "other users of the Internet" are a small minority outside the U.S.

> If they play political games then they will very
> quickly lose credibility and other bodies may try
> to perform the same functions.

How well would the Internet run with the U.S. chunk cut out of the picture?

> Consider the present situation with top level domains.

The TLD issue is a joke.

I have a solution for that, too (surprised?):  Set up a maximum of 676 TLDs
with names like .xaa, .xab, .xac, etc., and hash the second-level names to
one of the TLDs.  Result: domain names are spread over nearly 700 TLDs,
instead of just two or three, and since any second-level name always hashes
to the same TLD, it is no longer necessary to specify the TLD explicitly.
The TLD has no real purpose from a logical standpoint, so why not just
eliminate it?  It would be a lot easier to type just "disney" (which would
hash to disney.xdy) and "ibm" (which would hash to ibm.xim), than disney.com
and ibm.com.

> There is argument with the EU TLD.

Europeans spend most of their time arguing, which is why they are
continually steamrollered by the U.S., which is busy implementing instead.

> It also appears that the US Department of Commerce
> still controls the root servers, hardly an independent body.

Maybe, but at least it keeps the servers stable.  I shudder to think what
the Internet would be like if Italy were managing one server and Switzerland
another and Greece still another.  Half the Internet would be inaccessible
half the time.

> If the EU Council of Ministers get annoyed enough with
> the situation there is no reason why they couldn't run
> their own root servers and issue a directive that all
> EU based organisations should add a line to the DNS
> cache.

There's no reason why Europe as a whole cannot become the leading economic
superpower in the world, what with 600 million skilled workers--but it never
seems to happen.  They all spend too much time arguing to ever act
coherently as a group.  And so the U.S. does it for them.  At least someone
is doing it.

> Initially there would be chaos in this name space ...

Initially meaning 50-70 years.  Meanwhile the U.S. would be settled in six
months, and would squash the European initiative entirely decades before it
stabilized.

> ... but eventually all the major ISPs around the world
> would add the .EU servers to their cache records.

Why?  Almost all the sites they want to access are in the U.S.  Europe is a
land of Net consumers, not Net producers.

> This action would weaken overnight the control ICANN
> has on the name space ...

That's what worries me.

> I am not sure if this would be a good thing to happen.

It would not be a good thing.  Can you use the same electrical plug in any
receptable in Europe yet?  Hmm.  The same currency?  OK.  How about the same
language?  I give up.

> It would certainly make the net an interesting place
> in which the sites you could find would depend on the
> DNS servers you used and you could get two different sites
> with the same name.

I have trouble with that already.  And it would be great for censorship.

> On the other hand it would reduce the power of any
> single country to control the system.

Yes ... instead, twenty different countries would be controlling the system,
and you would get whatever managed to pass through all of their filters
still working--that is to say, nothing at all.

RE: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Philip J. Nesser II]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2000 3:44 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not? 
> 
> I wonder how human beings manage to route their cars from one point
> to another, given how much more slowly they process things than do
> routers.  
> 

Trying to dismiss a technical problem with a facile analogy that is
not relevant is not a way to pursuade.  Roadways to not change
topology dozens of times per second.  Cars do not travel at a large
percentage of the speed of light so calculating the route to your
corner store usually doesn't involve considering routes through
Denver, New York, Dallas, Chicago, San Jose, Washington DC and
Atlanta all at the same time.  People don't often mathematically
optimize their routes based on traffic flow patterns that are being
inputed from hundreds of sources per second.  I could go on, but what
is the point?

If you want to participate on a mailing list devoted to engineering
of Internet protocols please don't expect to be listened to seriously
unless you are prepared to conduct the discussion on a technical
level.

- --->  Phil

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.3

iQA/AwUBOZXc9B8Cp2AdP9rUEQILmACg7CvmV8MmGyTyO/fD88KyWvMe69YAn1y0
L7zIuHr8nCQV3a11LyTZBIGa
=HnjF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> Because their cars move *much* slower than packets.

So do their brains.

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> This is a stupid argument. An IP packet (for instance)
> relies on external decision-making (the router) while
> a car has an intelligent (or at least decision-making)
> human inside, making the "car+human" unit self-supporting
> in terms of route decision.  

So?

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> Ever given a thought on the amount of effort explorers,
> cartographrs, road builders, maintainers have put into
> supplying you with the routing info you need to route
> your car?

No.  I just set the coordinates in my GPS and follow the arrow.  No map
required.

Re: Control by consent (Was Re: Any surprize at all?

[vinton g. cerf]

andy,

ICANN won't expel someone for raising issues in a thoughtful way - your message
is certainly to the point of one complex area of discourse. There are several 
scenarios that would lead to a .eu - an obvious one being the adoption of .eu
on the 3166-1 list by the ISO committee that maintains 3166.

vint

At 06:35 PM 8/12/2000 +0100, Andy Fletcher wrote:
>As a non-US person I get very concerned about lobby groups attempting to influence 
>address space assignments.  The only reason for IANA (and ICANN) to exist is to 
>co-ordinate the address space, protocol numbering  and name space assignments for 
>ENGINEERING purposes.
>
>If US based lobby organisations have an impact on number or naming assignments then 
>it is nothing less that an attempt to coerce the rest of the world into 
>North-American ldeals, morals and prejudices.
>
>IANA and ICANN only have power through the consent of the other users of the 
>Internet.  If they play political games then they will very quickly lose credibility 
>and other bodies may try to perform the same functions.
>
>Consider the present situation with top level domains.  There is argument with the EU 
>TLD. Officially ICANN has no position on the matter because as of March there was no 
>formal application but it would appear that ICANN would oppose this citing the reason 
>that the EU is not an ISO country. Who gives them the right to do this? - themselves. 
>It also appears that the US Department of Commerce still controls the root servers, 
>hardly an independent body.
>
>If the EU Council of Ministers get annoyed enough with the situation there is no 
>reason why they couldn't run their own root servers and issue a directive that all EU 
>based organisations should add a line to the DNS cache.  Initially there would be 
>chaos in this name space but eventually all the major ISPs around the world would add 
>the .EU servers to their cache records.
>
>This action would weaken overnight the control ICANN has on the name space especially 
>when other registries realise that they no longer have to pay money to ICANN to 
>maintain root servers (another bone of contention at the moment). Other TLDs will 
>only come into being if they can get their records added into a good proportion of 
>the name servers.
>
>I am not sure if this would be a good thing to happen. It would certainly make the 
>net an interesting place in which the sites you could find would depend on the DNS 
>servers you used and you could get two different sites with the same name. On the 
>other hand it would reduce the power of any single country to control the system.
>
>I suppose ICANN will expel me from the At-Large membership now.
>
>Andy

=
WorldCom
22001 Loudoun County Parkway
Building F2, Room 4115, ATTN: Vint Cerf
Ashburn, VA 20147
Telephone (703) 886-1690
FAX (703) 886-0047


"INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!" 
INET 2001: Internet Global Summit 
5-8 June 2001 
Sweden International Fairs 
Stockholm, Sweden 
http://www.isoc.org/inet2001

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[Eric Brunner]

there was a time when the assertion that string allocation policies in the
dns are subordinate to trademark registration was viewed as exotic, if not
deranged or at best mildly ignorant.

some community or another, together with some government and some contractor,
and innumerable sundry other actors, transformed the value of the assertion,
or allowed the transformation to occur (but only in ascii).

arin's executive seat is vacant. even if "zoning" is only a territorial
jurisdictional issue, like manditory-to-implement des, and confined to the
us and other odd bits of the world, there doesn't appear to be the capacity
to resist/instruct/co-opt/...  the next ira magaziner et alia who wander by.

for professional reasons i'm having to grapple with the awkward bits of http
metadata filtering (copa comes to mind, as does the eu's data act, etc.) in
the presence of ... a regretable pending rfc. the excesses (overspecification)
of the atechnical participants in this policy area are ... non-negligable.

for civic reasons i've had to grapple with the awkward bits of the technical
projection of institutional policies most of this list's participant assume
are inoperative or negligable or ... simply infra dig. the excesses ... etc.

list chatter isn't going to correct don, srinija or bill (copa commissioners,
and possessed of ip-clue), it isn't going to fix "zoning" as a vehicle for
specific access or cost recovery policies, or the subordination of routing
based address allocation policies to content-access based polices.

personally i can wait for the day when protocols and parameters are subject
to data-free atechnical policy examination for necessity and utility -- only
i suspect it has already arrived.

g. stein wrote of oakland, there's no "there" there. i hope we're not really
playing dress-up when we gesture as if there is a "here" here.

cheers,
eric

Control by consent (Was Re: Any surprize at all?

[Andy Fletcher]

As a non-US person I get very concerned about lobby groups attempting to 
influence address space assignments.  The only reason for IANA (and ICANN) 
to exist is to co-ordinate the address space, protocol numbering  and name 
space assignments for ENGINEERING purposes.

If US based lobby organisations have an impact on number or naming 
assignments then it is nothing less that an attempt to coerce the rest of 
the world into North-American ldeals, morals and prejudices.

IANA and ICANN only have power through the consent of the other users of 
the Internet.  If they play political games then they will very quickly 
lose credibility and other bodies may try to perform the same functions.

Consider the present situation with top level domains.  There is argument 
with the EU TLD. Officially ICANN has no position on the matter because as 
of March there was no formal application but it would appear that ICANN 
would oppose this citing the reason that the EU is not an ISO country. Who 
gives them the right to do this? - themselves. It also appears that the US 
Department of Commerce still controls the root servers, hardly an 
independent body.

If the EU Council of Ministers get annoyed enough with the situation there 
is no reason why they couldn't run their own root servers and issue a 
directive that all EU based organisations should add a line to the DNS 
cache.  Initially there would be chaos in this name space but eventually 
all the major ISPs around the world would add the .EU servers to their 
cache records.

This action would weaken overnight the control ICANN has on the name space 
especially when other registries realise that they no longer have to pay 
money to ICANN to maintain root servers (another bone of contention at the 
moment). Other TLDs will only come into being if they can get their records 
added into a good proportion of the name servers.

I am not sure if this would be a good thing to happen. It would certainly 
make the net an interesting place in which the sites you could find would 
depend on the DNS servers you used and you could get two different sites 
with the same name. On the other hand it would reduce the power of any 
single country to control the system.

I suppose ICANN will expel me from the At-Large membership now.

Andy

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[R. A. Hettinga]

At 8:24 AM -0500 on 8/12/00, Matt Crawford wrote:


> Donna Rice Hughes, Author, Kids Online/Founder, Protectkids.com

Ah. There we go.

"Taking a poll" again, it seems. Monkey business, indeed.

Cheers,
RAH
-- 
-
R. A. Hettinga 
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

Any surprize at all? (was Re: more on IPv6 address spaceexhaustion)

[R. A. Hettinga]

At 9:25 PM -0400 on 8/11/00, vinton g. cerf wrote:


> good god we have the lobbyists trying to engineer the Internet
> now - everyone is an expert it seems. :-(

Is that any surprize to anybody?

They have guns, they take your money, and they make you do things with
both. Same as it ever was.

That will probably change someday, reality, economic or otherwise, not
being entirely optional, and the very attempts to legislate physics
demonstrated by "kiddiespace" proposals like this one demonstrate just how
"real" the internet has become.

Fortunately "code" is more real than "Code", as it were.

Cheers,
RAH
-- 
-
R. A. Hettinga 
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[Bill Manning]

% > the Commission on Online Child Protection is looking at dividing the
% > IPv6 address space into regions that can be classified according to
% > their "safety" for child access.
% 
% 
%   THE CHILD ONLINE PROTECTION ACT (COPA) COMMISSION 
% 
%   Commissioners: 
% 
% William L. Schrader, PSINet 
% Larry Shapiro, Disney's Go.com 
% Srinija Srinivasan, Yahoo! Inc. 
% 
% See any IP clue?
% 


Yup.  You don't?

--bill

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[John Day]

At 6:44 -0400 8/12/00, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>> Let me try and say this kindly (since after it is
>> pointed out several hundred times it gets quite
>> frustrating).  If you don't see the processing
>> requirements then you have *no* understanding of how
>> routing works.
>
>You need not go to great pains to be "kind" about it.  This is a pretty
>standard preamble to a post that essentially means "I disagree."
>
>> The *first* function is to calculate that forwarding
>> table used above.  This is the place that processing
>> power is needed.  On busy routers this calculation can
>> be necessary hundreds of times a second.  The more
>> routes the larger the process of recalculating the
>> forwarding table when a change *anywhere* in the
>> topology occurs.
>
>I wonder how human beings manage to route their cars from one point to
>another, given how much more slowly they process things than do routers.

Because their cars move *much* slower than packets.

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[Matt Crawford]

> I have heard on some local (SF bay area) technology news reports that
> the Commission on Online Child Protection is looking at dividing the
> IPv6 address space into regions that can be classified according to
> their "safety" for child access.


  THE CHILD ONLINE PROTECTION ACT (COPA) COMMISSION 

  Commissioners: 

Donald Telage, Network Solutions Inc. - Commission Chairman 
Stephen Balkam, Internet Content Rating Association 
John Bastian, Security Software Systems 
Jerry Berman, Center for Democracy & Technology 
Robert C. Cotner, Evesta.com 
Arthur H. DeRosier, Jr., Rocky Mountain College 
J. Robert Flores, National Law Center for Children and Families 
Albert F. Ganier III, Education Networks of America 
Michael E. Horowitz, Department of Justice 
Donna Rice Hughes, Author, Kids Online/Founder, Protectkids.com 
William M. Parker, Crosswalk.com 
C. Lee Peeler, Federal Trade Commission 
Gregory L. Rohde, Department of Commerce/NTIA 
C. James Schmidt, San Jose State University 
William L. Schrader, PSINet 
Larry Shapiro, Disney's Go.com 
Srinija Srinivasan, Yahoo! Inc. 
Karen Talbert, Nortel Networks 
George Vradenburg III, America Online, Inc. 

See any IP clue?

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Mike Bresina]

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Loa Andersson wrote:

> > I wonder how human beings manage to route their cars from one point to
> > another, given how much more slowly they process things than do routers.
> 
> Ever given a thought on the amount of effort explorers, cartographrs, 
> road builders, maintainers have put into supplying you with the routing
> info you need to route your car?
 
Now if they'd find a way to minimize the length of the queues...
 
---
Mike Bresina   ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior System Administrator
Systems Engineer
Intellicom Network Operations Center
http://mike.vsat.net/

v.  (925) 245-
f.  (925) 606-7273
---

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Henning Schulzrinne]

"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
> 
> In message <003b01c003c6$3ffe9230$0a0a@contactdish>, "Anthony Atkielski" wr
> ites:
> >> The telephone company has milliseconds to seconds
> >> to resolve an address into a route. The Internet
> >> has microseconds to nanoseconds to do so.
> >
> >Build faster hardware.
> >
> >
> We seem to be talking 5-6 orders of magnitude in speed here.  Even
> Moore's Law doesn't help in that range.
> 

Also, circuit setup needed for establishing routing labels requires at
least one round trip time (ignoring processing time), which is pretty
much a constant given geographic distance.

-- 
Henning Schulzrinne   http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Måns Nilsson]

Anthony Atkielski wrote:

> I wonder how human beings manage to route their cars from one point to
> another, given how much more slowly they process things than do routers.

This is a stupid argument. An IP packet (for instance) relies on
external decision-making (the router) while a car has an intelligent (or
at least decision-making) human inside, making the "car+human" unit
self-supporting in terms of route decision.  

-- 
Måns NilssonDNS Technichian
+46 709 174 840 NIC-SE
+46 8 545 85 707MN1334-RIPE

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Loa Andersson]

Anthony Atkielski wrote:

> I wonder how human beings manage to route their cars from one point to
> another, given how much more slowly they process things than do routers.

Ever given a thought on the amount of effort explorers, cartographrs, 
road builders, maintainers have put into supplying you with the routing
info you need to route your car?

/Loa

-- 

Loa Andersson
Director Routing Architecture Lab, EMEA
St Eriksgatan 115A, PO Box 6701
113 85 Stockholm, Sweden
phone: +46 8 50 88 36 34,   mobile + 46 70 522 78 34
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Anthony Atkielski]

> Let me try and say this kindly (since after it is
> pointed out several hundred times it gets quite
> frustrating).  If you don't see the processing
> requirements then you have *no* understanding of how
> routing works.

You need not go to great pains to be "kind" about it.  This is a pretty
standard preamble to a post that essentially means "I disagree."

> The *first* function is to calculate that forwarding
> table used above.  This is the place that processing
> power is needed.  On busy routers this calculation can
> be necessary hundreds of times a second.  The more
> routes the larger the process of recalculating the
> forwarding table when a change *anywhere* in the
> topology occurs.

I wonder how human beings manage to route their cars from one point to
another, given how much more slowly they process things than do routers.

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[J. Noel Chiappa]

> From: Rick H Wesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> this stems from the lack of engineers intrest in politics, until its
> too late.

Err, not quite. That's what sad, actually - the point I made was a policy
point, not a technical point - and thus presumably one that someone doesn't
need to be an engineer to apprehend.

I didn't even get to the technical reasons why this is a bad idea

Noel

RE: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not?

[Philip J. Nesser II]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Anthony,

Let me try and say this kindly (since after it is pointed out several
hundred times it gets quite frustrating).  If you don't see the
processing requirements then you have *no* understanding of how
routing works.  Forwarding packets is easy.  Routers basically have
two related but completely seperate functions.

The *second* function is to take an incoming packet, look at its
destination address, compare it to its forwarding table, and forward
the packet.  This is easy in the whole scheme of things.

The *first* function is to calculate that forwarding table used
above.  This is the place that processing power is needed.  On busy
routers this calculation can be necessary hundreds of times a second.
 The more routes the larger the process of recalculating the
forwarding table when a change *anywhere* in the topology occurs.

- --->  Phil

P.S.  Go find the CIDRD archives, or (if you want even earlier) try
the big-ip list to see the debate dozens of times.


> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 9:38 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sequentially assigned IP addresses--why not? 
> 
> 
> > We seem to be talking 5-6 orders of magnitude in
> > speed here.  Even Moore's Law doesn't help in that range.
> 
> I don't see why all this processing power is required.  You look at
> the incoming address, you figure out which outbound path can handle
> that address, and you forward it.  Simple.  Even if the full
> address is a thousand digits long, you only have to look at the
> digits around 
> your level
> to determine the next step in routing.
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.3

iQA/AwUBOZT4YR8Cp2AdP9rUEQKQIwCfQUa6eJOLwwXGgXEgcxw4cMHQ/NYAnAwx
ZLxXZHam4Ns5cxWJy4zaA5sB
=Rdyp
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[Anthony Atkielski]

> this stems from the lack of engineers intrest in politics, until its
> too late.

It couldn't possibly stem from the lack of politicians' interest in
engineering, could it?

Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

[Fred Baker]

At 12:19 AM 8/12/00 -0400, J. Noel Chiappa wrote:
>One wonders about the wattage level of the people on the commision,
>but I digress.

Oh, it's not the watts. watts are power times capability. These people have 
high power and ...