nanog mailing list archives

Re: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)


From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 09:30:16 +0800


On Mar 3, 2010, at 6:38 AM, Leen Besselink wrote:


Not comparing this to the former-DDR or Chinese situation (please refer
to my tin-foil remark above) a per-country specific prefix is not
necessarily a bad thing and may even have an upside.

    
Care to explain what that could possibly be? (I simply don't see an
upside to making it easy to censor the internet by national identity).

  

Maintenance of "GeoIP"-databases becomes easier and less error-prone ?

Um, you say that like it's a good thing.

Possible less out of date because of it.

True.

We've seen complaints about those many times on this list.


Yes, geolocation by IP is a fundamentally broken idea and process.
That's, frankly, a good thing in my opinion.

However, ignoring all of that for a moment, what makes you assume
that CIRs would only delegate prefixes within their own nation under
this scheme? I suspect several countries will likely be happy to sell
or rent address space to the highest bidder.

Owen



Current thread: