Re: IP stability and benefits to US Internet Users?

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

Michael and all,

Michael Dillon wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Walter Wright wrote:
>
> > I still want to know who represents my interests an an ordinary US
> > citizen at ARIN and other policy making bodies controlling  internet
> > technology?
>
> Me.
>
> According to the ARIN bylaws the AC may include non-members of ARIN to
> represent the public interest and the broader community affected by the
> Internet. Since I am a non-member of ARIN and hold a position on the
> Advisory Council, that makes me your representative.

  God help us all than!  Not to mention that only having ONE person that was not
selected by the user community is inappropriate.

>
>
> > It would a simple
> > yes or no, and if yes the title of the law.
>
> You know, I *DID* answer your questions. If the answers didn't make it to
> the DOMAIN-POLICY list then you should subscribe to NAIPR@ARIN.NET
> instead.

  And those supposed answers were grossly inadequate.  In other words they
were "non-answers".

>
>
> >        Technology seems to be already out there ahead of the current IP
> > allocation process.  Fixed addresses are as inevitable for electronic
> > communication as they were  necessary for  the old US mail and ringing
> > telephones.  Dynamic IP reminds me of the old Pony Express where the riders
> > went from point to point and handed off the mailbags to fresh riders on fresh
> > horses. All those horses & riders costs a lot.
>
> Thankfully, we can do dynamic IPv4 addressing without moving around
> anything more substantial than electrons and we have the domain name
> system to supply us with fixed addresses.
>
> >       From my perspective,  as an ordinary Internet user,  the ARIN structure
> > and policies concerning the allocation of IP is inconsistent with the your
> > stated goal of stability and also important for orderly growth.  It appears
> > to be structured like a big hour glass.  All the available address on the
> > top.
>
> Excellent observation!

  Sure are excellent observations.  And they have been presented many many
times, yet there have been no real addressing of those observations, as usual.

> This is precisely how the IPv4 address space is
> organized in order to correspond more or less to the way in which the
> world's population is organized. That is to say that there are more people
> in the world who do not have Internet access than have it. In order to
> avoid international incidents, we allocate the IPv4 space based on need.

  How is this need determined?  Whom determines the need?  Why does not the
requester determine the need?

> If it *DOES* run out it will happen at a time when a much larger
> percentage of the world's population has access. In addition we will have
> a reasonable technical explanation for depleting the IPv4 space, namely
> that the addresses are actually in use and efficiently allocated. And
> lastly, when this time does come we will be much, much closer to being
> able to universally deploy IPv6 addresses which are not as limited as IPv4
> addresses.
>
> > I need a static IP. I am a small user,  but you have granted all
> > the allocations in giant blocks to giant organizations, who in turn bundle it
> > with other services and products that I don't need or want
>
> I understand. Here, you can use the IPv4 address 10.254.1.27 for your
> needs. For more info on this address refer to RFC 1918.

  RFC1918 has already been determined by many as being inadequate.

>
>
> > I cannot even find someone who will help me obtain an address for a
> > bunch of sixth graders who should already be learning this new
> > technology.
>
> Contact your local Linux users group for the technical assistance, find a
> 486 that can be configured as a server and get the Linux folks to train
> your 6th graders in setting up an Internet server. Use 10.253.7/24 for
> the IP addresses you will need on your network.
>
> > When IP is so coveted that no holder
> > will even consider helping the educational process something is out of sync
> > and you begin to look around for the reasons.
>
> Yes, lack of money to pay for services can be hard to live with. But you
> can still use Internet technology entirely within a private network using
> RFC1918 IP addresses. This is commonly referred to as an intranet.
>
> And, yes, I have direct experience in connecting two high schools to the
> Internet using FreeBSD machines, natd and RFC 1918 addresses. It works
> like a charm and the ISP had no problems with allocating the single public
> IP address that each school needed.
>
> > I have the same concern now about the way the transfer of the Internet
> > assets was handled when the transfer went from NSF to NSI/ARIN.
>
> There was no transfer of assets. ARIN had to rent new offices, buy new
> furniture and computers. It was a ground-zero startup operation. The only
> thing that was transferred was some data which had zero dollar value.

  IP allocations have zero value?  We beg to differ.  It those same allocations
are sold, than they cannot have zero value.

>
>
> > We paid for the development through the use of public funds to do all
> > the R&D, etc.
>
> And you have certainly enjoyed an enormous economic benefit as a result.
>
> > Who knows, maybe these type of practices will kill it off and it will never
> > blossom as everyone hopes.
>
> I read this and wonder if I'm in a time warp and this message was actually
> written back in 1993. Are you not aware of the huge boom in Internet
> growth and ancillary industries over the past 5 years? The Internet was
> blossoming in 1995 and 1996. It has gone well beyond that stage now.
>
> > I do not feel comfortable that the way ARIN has been allocating the
> > huge blocks of IP to the carriers is in my best interest.
>
> Do you think your interests should take precedence over those of the
> hundreds of thousands of other citizens who have chosen to use these
> carriers as their Internet provider?

  They should be viewed equally.

>
>
> >     I also do not believe that I have much in common with the huge ISPs that
> > constitute a large part of the ARIN membership. They don't represent my
> > interest.   I visualize a time in the future where virtually every computer
> > could easily have a "built-in router"
>
> Every computer with two network connections already has a built-in router
> and it has been like this for at least the past 10 years.
>
> >     Lastly, individuals such as my self want privacy in our communications as
> > much, if not more than large corporations.
>
> So install encryption software. This has nothing to do with IPv4 addresses
> at all.
>
> > If that firm is relying upon dynamic
> > IPs and an outside ISP instead of a fixed address and in-house server,  there
> > is no way to be absolutely certain that an unscrupulous and unethical person
> > would not intercept the communication at the site of the ISP server and use
> > it illegally and thereby cause great, irreparable and possibly undetected
> > harm to the law firm and its legal client.
>
> I'll let you in on a little secret. Crackers and industrial spies have
> been intercepting communications like this for many years now even when
> fixed IP addresses are used. Anyone who does not encrypt sensitive
> communications is a fool.
>
> > The
> > hierarchical  manner in which ARIN and its predecessors have being doling out
> > the allocation of IP addresses needs to be changed.
>
> If we throw away the hierarchical allocation then we also discard our
> ability to operate a global Internet. To date, network researchers have
> not come up with a better way to allocate IPv4 address space. This is an
> area in which policy must take second place to technical realities. If we
> declare a policy which is impossible to implement then we are no better
> than the state legislature that once tried to legislate 3 as the value of
> pi.
>
> >       I sincerely hope that ARIN or whoever ultimately controls the
> > assignment of Internet addresses will start really looking at the potential
> > from the point of view of the ordinary people
>
> We have already been doing this for a long time. That is largely the
> reason why IPv4 allocation is done the way it is currently.

  Than why can't Walt get an IP address that he has requested?

>
>
> --
> Michael Dillon                 -               Internet & ISP Consulting
> Memra Communications Inc.      -               E-mail: michael@memra.com
> Check the website for my Internet World articles -  http://www.memra.com
>
>

regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com