[pp.int.general] /!\ Fwd: Re: [Algemeen] [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd) /!\

Mårten Fjällström marten.fjallstrom at piratpartiet.se
Tue Mar 2 12:56:23 CET 2010

Does not the ITU work on consensus rather then voting?

Is there a particular member that could be influenced? And who are
members these days? States or phone companies?

Mårten Fjällström
Party secretary, piratpartiet

On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 17:29 +0100, coretx at piratenpartij.nl wrote:
> Time for action ! Our failsafe is under attack.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Algemeen] [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU
> IPv6 Group (fwd)
> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 15:19:38 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Sven Olaf Kamphuis <sven at cb3rob.net>
> To: algemeen at lists.piratenpartij.nl, aktive at lists.piratenpartei.de
> There you go.
> let the riots commence 2.0....
> keep in mind, most telcos and ISPs (the founders and members of the 
> current IANA -> RIRS -> LIRs model resulting in a global internet which is 
> hard to censor) do not agree on this ITU proposal...
> it's just that the UN and their ITU do...
> If we allow them to go forward, this WILL result in a "per country" 
> easy-to-filter internet in a few years when ipv6 is the only serious 
> protocol left.
> we only need to point out how easy it was for the DDR to simply route
> all phonecalls to "the west" through a room where people monitored 
> telephone conversations, and this "country specific prefix" is just what 
> the ITU seems to want for the internet.
> In order to accomplish that they want to create their own address 
> registry, for now "secondary" to the ISP/telco run bottom-down RIR system 
> (RIPE,ARIN,APNIC,AFRINIC,APNIC) but ofcourse we can't expect it to take 
> long before repressive governments start to force "the internets" "in 
> their country" to use only the ITU registry...
> also very nice of them to invite the "RIRS" to be present at their little 
> negotiation rounds, where the RIRS can each have one vote against oh eh, 
> 150 or so of their members... very democratic.. 5 against 150..
> And i bet you they'll go "yes but the RIRs were present at our meetings" 
> in the end, so its better to just send them a letter telling them to stick 
> it where the sun doesn't shine and not even go to their little meetings.
> How does this relate to our situation in germany:
> Now for those complaining about me posting to the piratenpartei lists in 
> ENOTGERMAN, too bad for you people... the world is slightly larger than 
> those 140 million or so people that use german on a daily basis.
> I can personally assure you von der leyen and schaubele would have had wet 
> dreams about this ITU proposal a few months ago still..., and you never 
> know, we may get simular politicians again in the future...
> (makes it -really- easy to filter all kinds of government-undesired 
> content and activities...)
> now -we- can always move our office to some other country and take our tax 
> money to some other resort, not a biggie, but don't come complaining to me 
> when germany at some point uses this to build their own chinese bigass 
> golden firewall with flames coming out of its ass to make it faster.
> i'd say its better to simply not give them the chance to do so.
> methods available to isps/telcos to stop this:
> - point out to governments that -we- own the internet, their economy runs 
> over it as a "courtesy" and that we can send them back to the stoneage at 
> any time we like by simply dropping 'their' traffic.
> (considering the fact that governments themselves are not capable of 
> running anything but a gray-cheese-with-a-dial telephone network, they 
> don't have any other option than to remain friends with us, while -we- can 
> move our business to -any- of the 208 countries or so worldwide, wether 
> the UN likes those countries or not, and pay taxes -there-, and most of 
> the likely candidates are nice and warm and have a beach too and are 
> willing to make deals in the "guaranteed information freedom" aspect ;)
> - if they get this done, simply ignore their registry, maybe introduce 
> overlaps
> - if they get this done, drop the whole ipv6 implementation plans and move 
> on to some "next" protocol or even keep ipv4 around if we have to.
> they need us, we don't need them
> Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what has your country ever 
> done for you.
> we have the biggest stick in this matter.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 15:52:04 +0100
> From: Michiel Ettema <MEttema at alkmaar.nl>
> To: members-discuss at ripe.net
> Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
> Maybe this will give you an insight in what is planned:
> http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/oth/01/0B/D010B0000073301PDFE.pdf page
> 89.
> - 777
> - 14.  As the use of the Internet and other new technologies increase,
> - more criminals are provided with opportunities to commit crimes
> remotely,
> - via telephone lines and data networks.  Presently, malicious
> programming
> - code and harmful communications (such as child pornography) may pass
> - through several carriers located in different countries.  And
> - infrastructures such as banking and finance increasingly are becoming
> - networked and thereby vulnerable to cyber-attack from distant
> locations.
> - We convene today to provide additional personal attention to and
> - direction for our joint action against this transnational criminality.
> If the ITU gets registry status I think it wil not be long before their
> Cybercrime legislation proposals will state that the only safe adres
> space
> is ITU adres space. This because a country can subject that adres space
> to their own laws.
> Now excuse me a minute while I fold my tin foil hat.
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: members-discuss-admin at ripe.net
> [mailto:members-discuss-admin at ripe.net] Namens Arjan van der Oest
> Verzonden: maandag 1 maart 2010 15:24
> Aan: Andy Davidson; members-discuss at ripe.net; nanog at nanog.org
> Onderwerp: RE: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6
> Group
> Andy scribbled:
> >>>> Competition is not a bad thing.
> >>> Competition would be if I could approach the NCC or Pepsi Cola for
> my
> >>> integers for use on the internet.  It is not competition if the
> >>> government makes me ask them for some integers.
> >> Assuming that ITU would become a nationwide alternative RIR, you
> still
> >> have the choice to approach NCC, wouldn't you?
> >
> >Why would this automatically be the case ?  If governments were
> required
> >to distribute addresses via the national regulator, then the freedom of
> >choice would NOT be the case.
> True. Like I said in my initial reply to members-discuss (and while
> playing a devil's advocate role), I'm not entirely sure what it is that
> ITU is striving for : replacing IANA or just becoming a nationwide RIR.
> In the latter case this would not automatically mean (also assuming that
> local governments will not further interfere in this process) that ITU
> would be your one and only one-stop-shop for integers.
> But anyhow, don't get me wrong. I agree with all that has been said on
> why and how ITU is trying to get a grip on packet switched communication
> networks. My only point it that it might not be a bad idea to ponder on
> the subject of allowing competition between RIR's in the same
> geographical aerea and hence allow ITU to achieve the status of
> nationwide RIR.
> If Telco's want to request their IP's from ITU instead of RIPE, they
> have my utterly blessings...
> *zipping my Dr. Pepper*
> --
> Met vriendelijke groet / Kind Regards,
> Worldmax Operations B.V.
> Arjan van der Oest
> Network Design Engineer
> T.: +31 (0) 88 001 7912
> F.: +31 (0) 88 001 7902
> M.: +31 (0) 6 10 62 58 46
> E.: arjan.van.der.oest at worldmax.nl
> W.:www.worldmax.nl
> W.:www.aerea.nl
> GPG: https://keyserver.pgp.com/ (Key ID: 07286F78, fingerprint: 2E9F
> 3AE2 0A8B 7579 75A9  169F 5D9E 5312 0728 6F78)
> Internet communications are not secure; therefore, the integrity of this
> e-mail cannot be guaranteed following transmission on the Internet. This
> e-mail may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> e-mail in error, please notify the sender and erase this e-mail. Use of
> this e-mail by any person other than the addressee is strictly
> forbidden. This e-mail is believed to be free of any virus that might
> adversely affect the addressee's computer system; however, no
> responsibility is accepted for any loss or damage arising in any way
> from its use. All the preceding disclaimers also apply to any possible
> attachments to this e-mail.
> ----
> If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss
> list, please log in to your LIR Portal account at:
> http://lirportal.ripe.net/ First click on General and then click on
> Edit.
> At the bottom of the Page you can add or remove addresses.
> ==================================================================
> ==================================================================
> Disclaimer Gemeente Alkmaar:
> Aan dit mailbericht kunnen geen rechten ontleend worden.
> No rights can be derived from the contents of this E-mail message.
> ==================================================================
> ----
> If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss list,
> please log in to your LIR Portal account at: http://lirportal.ripe.net/
> First click on General and then click on Edit.
> At the bottom of the Page you can add or remove addresses.
> _______________________________________________
> Algemeen mailing list
> Algemeen at lists.piratenpartij.nl
> http://lists.piratenpartij.nl/mailman/listinfo/algemeen
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general

More information about the pp.international.general mailing list