Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
12.50% |7 | 20.17% |68845 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14.29% |8 | 16.05% |54788 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10.71% |6 | 11.04% |37680 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7.14% |4 | 5.65% |192
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 10:06:16 -0400
"Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IANA already manages things like enterprise-id numbers. And, then
> there's the existing IPv4 address space (how many assigned addresses are
> returned or reclaimed?).
>
> While ULA's could potentially be used b
> So, I think this "property rights" issue FUD.
please don't shoot the messenger. but in most of meatspace, if there's a
thing you pay (either one time or recurring) to get exclusive use of, and it's
of value (if you lost your use of it, it would financially injure you), then
it's property. the
> ... I *would* recommend that the robot be hosted by a trusted organization.
as ietf, itu, icann, ep.net, and isc have all proved, most organizations are
trusted by most people, but no organization is trusted by everybody. what
specific trust threshold are you aiming for in the above stated requ
IANA already manages things like enterprise-id numbers. And, then
there's the existing IPv4 address space (how many assigned addresses are
returned or reclaimed?).
While ULA's could potentially be used by a much larger number of
entities, they may also not be used except by larger organizations. D
On 2007-06-08 17:15, Bill Manning wrote:
presuming this course of action is taken, it raises a much larger
issue consisting of the IETF creating "property rights" in the
address space arena.
I decline to take the issue of property rights seriously in a
pseudo-random space of 2**40 natural nu
