Re: [Internetgovtech] the WCIT detour

[David Conrad <[e-mail]>]

Phillip,

On Feb 8, 2014, at 6:58 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > I proposed giving the governments the blocks, not that they be encouraged to put them into service.
> 
> How would you dissuade them?
> 
> For the address blocks to be any use, deployment of IPv6 would have to be achieved. The blocks I suggest are large enough to provide a sovereign reserve but not so large that they could be used without considerable consideration and planning.

And governments are well known for considerable consideration and planning?

> My expectation is that most countries would subcontract management of their blocks to a specialist just like most of them subcontract management of their CC TLDs.

In other words, they'd put the addresses into service albeit through a third party?

> > Threat of a US blockade of IPv6 addresses is a legitimate and realistic concern.
> 
> How would that work exactly?
> 
> Pinhead in Congress realizes that he might get the Cubano vote in Florida if he suggests kicking Cuba off the Internet. Attaches amendment to some must pass bill that causes the head of ICANN or the RIRs to go to jail if they give addresses to Cuba. Congress votes for it because they don't want their scorecard to be dinged.

And how exactly would that stop LACNIC from allocating addresses from their /12 to entities in Cuba (hint: ISPs in Cuba already gets their address space from LACNIC)?

Regards,
-drc