Re: [GLOBAL-V6]IPv6 Policy Proposal for LACNIC Region

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jordi and all,

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> I feel quite inappropriate and even wrong the comment regarding IPv6 development paid predominantly by US tax payers.

  I am sorry you feel that way, truly.  However that is a documented
fact.

>
>
> Are you counting the promotion cost, education cost, trials cost, the implementation cost, the deployment cost ? Are you assuming that all this has been done only by US ?

  No I am not and did not say that all these costs were born by the US.  However
most of them were.

> What about the rest of the Canada, Asia Pacific and Europe people, just to mention a few ?

  Where is a document outlining how much and when these countries
paid or have paid?  DOC/NTIA as well as the US federal Registry
does contain all of the funds from the than infrastructure budget
documented.  You or anyone may review those extant docs.

>
>
> IPv6 is not happening just because US.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> To: "Kurt Erik Lindqvist" <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>; "Jane Coffin" <jcoffin@ntia.doc.gov>
> Cc: <global-v6@lists.apnic.net>; "icann board address" <icann-board@icann.org>; "Kathy Smith" <KSMITH@ntia.doc.gov>; "Kenneth Jost" <kenneth.jost@usdoj.gov>
> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 9:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [GLOBAL-V6]IPv6 Policy Proposal for LACNIC Region
>
> > Kurt and all,
> >
> >   IPv6 was developed with public funds paid predominantly by
> > US tax payers.  Hence IPv6 is a PUBLIC resource.  As such
> > membership for any and all stakeholders is or must be assumed
> > and unencumbered.
> >
> > Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> >
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > On 2004-01-23, at 23.38, Randy Bush wrote:
> > >
> > > >> So, do you think that the isps would benefit from a homogenous policy
> > > >> in
> > > >> all the aspects or they would just require homogeneity in some
> > > >> specific
> > > >> aspects of the policy (such size of the address blocks assigned).
> > > >
> > > > i'll settle for what i can get.  but prefix length and swamp locations
> > > > are
> > > > biggies.  just think like a router.
> > >
> > > While I agree with Randy, and while I generally think that the current
> > > situation with different policies in each region is bad, as it makes
> > > people/companies go to the RIR that meets their needs the best - there
> > > are also regional/local differences that to some extent need to be
> > > catered for. Like what Marcelo says about allocation criteria.
> > >
> > > To make things worse, at least initially (and I think still) there
> > > where quite different views in the regions on what the allocation
> > > criteria should be. This was to some extent due the different
> > > membership models of the various RIRs. I still have quite some sympathy
> > > for the original RIPE LIR-WG proposal that anyone who was a member of
> > > RIPE NCC would get an allocation (actually I think it was anyone who
> > > applied - and given the current landslide that might have been a good
> > > thing(tm) ). Yes, it would put a price on addresses. But if you really
> > > need portable addressspace, you got to be this tall to ride...
> > >
> > > - - kurtis -
> > >
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > Version: PGP 8.0.3
> > >
> > > iQA/AwUBQBIlUqarNKXTPFCVEQJHlgCferB26d5C49/XZwjxneVAW7yMngUAoIcx
> > > SlOhMS0S/jJqql+97CW2p7Kb
> > > =v+f3
> > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > global-v6 mailing list
> > > global-v6@lists.apnic.net
> > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
> >     Pierre Abelard
> >
> > "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> > liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> > P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> > United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> > ===============================================================
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > global-v6 mailing list
> > global-v6@lists.apnic.net
> > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6
> >
>
> **********************************
> Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
> Presentations and videos on line at:
> http://www.ipv6-es.com
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801