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/

Reply via email to