North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: don't fall victim to FUD was Re: action: Santa Clara CA & Montgomery MD

  • From: scarter
  • Date: Fri Feb 27 17:10:19 1998

Gordon Cook wrote:

> Dear Nanog list members and Congress people
> Before you get too excercised about Bill Simpson's allegations in the
> message below let me provide some context that is missing from Mr.
> Simpson's message.  On Monday in the IETF mail list  considerable anger was
> displayed over the statement in the Green Paper that the IANA Policy
> Council would
> "coordinate the development of other technical protocol parameters as
> needed to maintain universal connectivity on the Internet."
> It was pointed out that the proper function should be to "coordinate the
> **assignment** of other technical protocol parameters . . ."

Even so, William's fears are not unfounded.   I don't like the idea of the US
government managing/administering/allocating/assigning or anything else in the
Internet.  The US government washed their hands of the Internet at the right
time, and fair play to them, whilst keeping and grandfatherly eye on the
proceedings.  The entity being talked about is NOT a US facility anymore, it is a
worldwide facility now and the US, or any, government should let the standards
and development continue unmolested.  I think we have grown up now and the US
government can retire fully from the Internet business......