In the same way that phone numbers or radio frequencies are allocated by geographical monopolies, yes. Except that the RIRs are *much* more open to participation. And you don't have to get addresses from RIRs; you can get them from NIRs in some cases, or LIRs everywhere.
What problem are you trying to solve? Lee -----Original Message----- From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+leehoward=hilcostreambank....@nanog.org> On Behalf Of William Herrin Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2024 3:48 PM To: Noah <n...@neo.co.tz> Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Shaping the Future of ICP-2: Community Input Extended to December 2024 This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments. On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 12:39 PM Noah <n...@neo.co.tz> wrote: > On Sun, 17 Nov 2024, 22:06 David Conrad via NANOG, <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: >> > 2. I'm not convinced that the service regions should be limited by the ICP >> > to non-overlapping geographic territories. >> >> While geographic monopolies may have made sense in the past, it is unclear >> to me how/why they make sense today (unless the point is to >> create/perpetuate a cartel). > > I am curious as to what you mean by create/perpetuate a cartel? A group of geographical monopolies who between them have total control over what the essential service costs and whether anybody else can perform it. It might as well be the definition of a cartel. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin b...@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/
