[AusNOG] [pacnog] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group

[Mark Smith]

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 07:51:09 +0000
pita at connect.com.fj wrote:

> Some folks just likeshooting down other organisations and missinmg the issues
> 
> Can the contribution be more on the issues otherwise take it elsewhere
> 

I'm not a member of the ITU, so they won't listen to me, and I'm not
going to spend $11 000 AUD (10,600 swiss francs) to become one. Why
bother spending time not "missing the issues" when you have no voice?

IETF membership is financially free, with the only cost being signing
up to mailing lists, spending some time reading Internet Drafts, and
making sure your opinion is a considered one if you're going to post
it.



> Keep the minds open as there are some real valid and serious issues here. 
> 
> So to start with,you can contribute on the issues raised or why the study is needed?
> 
> One of the commonly supported ideals is having competition. 
> 
> Is this an issue if organised well?
> 
> How about security.. Can we all live it to system?
> 
> I would really like to hear good strong arguments for both sides
> 
> Can such actions finally bring the sides to consolidate and make changes?
> 
> Thanks for the contribution
> Fred
> 
> 
> ------Original Message------
> From: Franck Martin
> Sender: pacnog-bounces at pacnog.org
> To: Skeeve Stevens
> Cc: nznog
> Cc: apnic-talk at apnic.net
> Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
> Cc: pacnog at pacnog.org
> Subject: Re: [pacnog] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
> Sent: Feb 27, 2010 11:12 AM
> 
> When I see Yet Another ITU Initiative (YAII tm), I just go to http://www.itu.int/spam/
> 
> Then I know, they'll make lot of noise, get everyone excited and wasting their time, get governments officials barking at the wrong tree, for the same results as above.
> 
> What did we have so far?
> -SPAM
> -DNS
> -NGN
> -Security
> 
> All of the above are less and less relevant for ITU, while the Internet Community and the industry are still tackling these problems with some results and with far less resources.
> 
> Franck Martin 
> http://www.avonsys.com/ 
> http://www.facebook.com/Avonsys 
> twitter: FranckMartin Avonsys 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Skeeve Stevens" <Skeeve at eintellego.net>
> To: apnic-talk at apnic.net, ausnog at ausnog.net, "nznog" <nznog at list.waikato.ac.nz>, pacnog at pacnog.org
> Sent: Friday, 26 February, 2010 5:08:19 PM
> Subject: [pacnog] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
> 
> This is an FYI for those interested.  Btw, RIPE NCC is the European version of APNIC for those that don't know.
> 
> The ITU are looking at bypassing the RIR's (Ripe, APNIC, ARIN, AFRINIC, LACNIC) and becoming their own numbering authority.  Clearly this is not the desired option as the structure already exists for exactly what they want to do, but rather than regionally, they want to do it per country.... for who knows what reason.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pacnog mailing list
> pacnog at pacnog.org
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/pacnog
> 
> 
> Sent via BlackBerry® from Vodafone.
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog