[discuss] we need to fix what may be broken

[Manning-ISI]

inline...

On 18April2014Friday, at 14:02, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 04:46:35PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
>> Just make a policy like the smallest routable block is a /32 (IPv6)
>> and you have to be able to justify it.
> 
> But this very statement imagines a fanciful world in which there is a
> Routing Committee of the Universe who gets to make that policy.  There
> isn't.

Yet.  See abuse of rPKI for just such a star chamber.

> 
> _Inter_networking is, by definition, voluntary.  It cannot be
> otherwise, because if it were that wouldn't be an _inter_net, but one
> network.  So I am the only one who gets to decide what my routing
> policies are, and what I will do for your packets.

Today, this is true (modulo legal constraints) ... It is not a given in the next
cycle.

> 
> If you are right and Memory Death of the Router Universe is coming,
> then the "policy" you are talking about might emerge as a BCP all on
> its own.  

I am prepared to take the stance that its not going to be a technical wall 
that we hit first.

> 
> But if people want instead to create an Internet Routing Ruling Cabal
> that makes these decisions, we just don't have the Internet any more,
> because we go from permissionless innovation to supplication to the
> Cabal.  I do not think it should become necessary to destroy the town
> to save it.

Those people exist and have been meeting.

/bill

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss