[governance] [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

While I agree 100% with David, here is a certain amount of crossover. 

Such proposals have been floating around ITU circles for a great many years - India and China especially have been floating a trial balloon for national allocation of IP addresses for a while.

India  eventually formed yet another instance of  that very asiapac creation - the NIR, an in country IP registry that works under the RIR framework and receives IP space from APNIC for allocation within India, so - theoretically - enabling Indian businesses to get local language support and pay the relevant fees in local currency.   China, Korea for example are other countries that formed NIRs years before India did.    

In the RIPE region, for similar reasons, they have LIRs, local internet registries, private industry players that receive large IP allocations from RIPE and allocate them to local customers, together with payment and support in the local currency and language.

--srs

> On 28-Nov-2015, at 11:48 AM, David Cake <dave at difference.com.au> wrote:
> 
> Why would states not compete for the award of rights of IP addresses if they were organised globally? Why do you wish to get rid of the RIRs? How do you think this relates to names, do you think that global generic (as opposed to country) names are a bad idea or is your proposal only for numbers?

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t