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

Tue Mar 2 21:57:49 CET 2010

The RIR's are being "neutral", and are not airing their ideas.

We have them on our side, but they can't go political.

Hence, we should air our opinion. Since we /can/ be political.

This is not only about countries being able to apply cencorship.

But also about spammers who can not get IP numbers from RIR's such as
ripe/apnic/afrinic/arin.

They might in the future, since their uncle is the sultan of islamistan.

Also, this could lead to a "one line legislation" saying, you need to
be a ITU member in order to be legally allowed to be a "ISP".

You can probably see the danger coming :)

Your local "fra" will like it as well, since it will become utmost
easy to only tap traffic from a single country. Hence, less diplomatic
"conflicts".

But they can also more easily hide the fact that they spy on their own citicens.

While looking at this, keep Q6 in mind !

The UN is trying to take full control over the internets.

On behalf of the EU and US.

This at the expense of a lot !

We can't just let this happen.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 17:33:27 +0100
From: RIPE NCC <ncc at ripe.net>
To: ncc-announce at ripe.net
Subject: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] ITU and IPv6 Consultation

Dear Colleagues,

On behalf of APNIC, we would like to draw your attention to an important
community consultation taking place on 3 March 2010.

______________________________________________________________________

APNIC Community Consultation Wednesday, 3 March 2010
_____________________________________________________________________

The ITU is considering the possibility of becoming an International
Internet Registry, as well as the possible implementation of a Country
Internet Registry model to use as an alternative to the Regional
Internet Registry system.

APNIC's Community Consultation session on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 is
your opportunity to discuss the issues and ramifications of the ITU's
possible entry into the IP address management arena.

Participate onsite
------------------

Where: Conference Hall 2, Kuala Lumpur Convention Center
When:  14:00 - 15:30

Participate online
------------------

When:  Kuala Lumpur time:  14:00 - 15:30
        UTC:                 6:00 -  7:30

How:   Audio and video streaming
        Interactive chat
        Live transcripts

For more information about how to attend this session remotely, see:

     http://meetings.apnic.net/29/remote

For more information about this session, refer to:

     http://meetings.apnic.net/29/program/consultation

You are also invited to submit written contributions to this session to:

     ipv6 at apnic.net

_______________________________________________________________________

APNIC Secretariat
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)    Tel: +61-7-3858-3100
PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 Australia             Fax: +61-7-3858-3199
Level 1, 33 Park Road, Milton, QLD                 http://www.apnic.net
_______________________________________________________________________

---- 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.

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Mårten Fjällström <
marten.fjallstrom at piratpartiet.se> wrote:

> 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?
>
> --
> Regards,
> 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
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20100302/ecea0ce3/attachment-0001.htm>