<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: Commecial vs fairness (was: spam support)

  • To:
  • From: "Clive D.W. Feather" < >
  • Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 08:33:07 +0000
  • Cc: "anti-spam-wg@localhost" < >

variable@localhost said:
>> That's not the point. If the terms are reasonable *for RIPE's monopoly
>> purpose*, then you can enforce them.
> Do you think asking AS's to apply border filters,

That one is perhaps arguable.

> respond to abuse/spam
> complaints

I don't think you could define "abuse/spam complaints" well enough. Or
"respond", for that matter. There are a huge number of issues that you need
to think through. And, most crucially, failure to "respond" to a
"complaint" doesn't alter the ability to operate TCP/IP.

> and to take down child pornography within x hours of them being
> notified is unreasonable?

Yes. Starting with the definition of "child" and working up/down from
there.

There's also a slippery slope you *really* don't want to get on.

> As stated before, the additional terms would have to be ones that were
> agreed on by a significant percentage of the RIPE membership.  I can't see
> many RIPE members signing up to a clause like that.

Irrelevant. If it were a policy that 51% agreed on, does that make it right
to impose it on the other 49% ? 99%/1% ?

> BTW, you don't need to use Cisco routers to apply border filters.

I know, and I didn't say that.

>> Rules beyond those necessary to ensure IP addresses are allocated
>> efficiently are outside their monopoly position. As such, there's a
>> presumption in (at least) English law that it's illegal.
> RIPE have a charter which cover a lot more than just allocating IP
> addresses.  Why would updating their charter to respond to the changes in
> internet be illegal?

Because they *do* have a monopoly in IP etc allocation. So they can update
their charter all they want, but if they use that update to abuse the
monopoly, that's illegal.

>> It doesn't matter if you get 95% support, it's still a monopoly.
> Welcome to the wonderful world of democracy Clive.

Try rereading what I said. Democracy passed those rules, because it
recognised that majority rule is not always true democracy.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  clive@localhost   | Tel:  +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert     | Home:  clive@localhost  | Fax:  +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc            |                            | NOTE: fax number change




  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>