Re: IP Block 99/8 (DHS insanity - offtopic)

["Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Mike Tancsa wrote:

> At 04:52 PM 4/23/2007, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> > I do not want any particular gov't (US or otherwise) to be "in
> > charge" of the Internet any more than the next person.  And good
> > thing too, because it simply cannot happen, political pipe-dreams not
> > withstanding.
> >
> > But what has that got to do with the DHS promoting an idea to sign IP
> > space allocations and/or annoucements?  The idea in-and-of-itself
> > doesn't sound wholly unreasonable.  (I am not advocating this, just
> > saying the idea shouldn't be rejected without consideration simply
> > because the DHS said it.)
>
> The question is who would do the signing and revocations. Whoever
> does that would indeed have a great amount of control over the
> internet.  A single government agency should not have that sort of
> power to make a (for lack of better term), "no surf list" of IP space...

I think the strawman proposals so far were something like:

1) iana has 'root' ca-cert
2) iana signs down certs for RIR's
3) RIR's sign down certs for LIR's
4) LIR's sign down certs for 'users' (where 'users' is probably
address-space users, like corporations or end-sites)

This seemed not-too-insane, and would give ISP/operator type folks that
ability to easily and quickly verify that:

157.242.0.0/16 is in point of fact permitted to originate by the org-id: LMU-1

with some level of authority... It's nothing really more than that.

-Chris
(who did spend some conference-room time with patrick/woody/doug/others
talking about this very problem)