[discuss] On Addresses and Identifiers / proceeding properly
mctimconsulting at gmail.com
Thu Mar 6 14:15:45 UTC 2014
I will try to dispel your misunderstanding:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Michel Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:
> Dear Seth,
> My question may look silly, but I try to find where lies the real
> political problem.
> as far I understand:
> 1. if one country decides to use a chunk of IP addresses for its citizens
> nobody will deny them
First, countries aren't the unit of IP address allocation. In some cases,
nation states do have a block or blocks of IPs for their own use, but it is
service providers who normally get allocations (blocks of addresses or
ranges of addresses).
If France for example decided to use 10/8 for all of it's citizens, then
ALL ISPs would block that range (as it is reserved for private addressing
in RFC1918). If France decided to use 3/8 (220.127.116.11 -18.104.22.168) for its
citizens then ISPs (besides those in France who were presumably mandated to
route those blocks) would filter out these route announcements as that
block is listed as registered to General Electric Company in the IANA
> and the calls will be routed.
If they were IP based calls, no. If they were POTS calls, they wouldn't
use IP addresses.
> 2. if a relational space or a country and a language (not to speak of a
> VN) decides to use another naming system than the DNS or another class than
> class IN nothing will prevent it from doing so.
Correct, besides the lack of interoperability with the rest of the Internet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss