Dave Edelman
On Jun 15, 2012, at 16:43, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 15, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: > >> >> >>> On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:59:26 -0400, Jay Ashworth said: >>>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/ >> >> The article sure does have a lot of threatening and smack-down tones toward >> service providers (us): >> >> >> >> "We're looking at a problem that's about to occur,""It occurs as service >> providers start to roll out V6." >> >> Our fault, no one else's... >> ------------------------------------ > > Who else would you blame for failing to update whois? > >> "This is not a question of willful rejection,""ISPs are happy to do this. >> They're just lazy...It doesn't have a direct impact on them and their >> ability to get new address space because they don't need new address space." >> >> Yep, we're definitely the lazy ones. No one else. >> ------------------------------------ > > Again, when it comes to failing to update whois, that's kind of where the > buck stops. > >> "We're hoping through all of this you can come up with some self-regulatory >> method in which you can do it," "Because otherwise, there will be other >> things that people are going to consider." >> >> That's definitely a threat. >> ------------------------------------- > > Reality is that we have always lived in an environment where adequate self > regulation is the only thing that prevents us from being subjected to > dramatically worse government-based regulation. So, as it is a threat, it is > also a statement of the reality that exists. > > Personally, I think that the article is counter-productive for the FBI in > what they are trying to achieve. > > It is interesting that not one ISP stepped up to say "Our policy is to keep > whois up to date for our IPv6 delegations just as we do now with our IPv4 > delegations." Had CNET contacted HE, that's the answer they would have > received. Is it really so hard? > >> "We're hoping that people in the community seize the opportunity to work and >> to have that self-regulation, because, if not, if all of the different >> governments then get involved, it could get uglier." >> >> Yeah, that one, too. >> ------------------------------------- > > Sure, it's a threat. In case you haven't noticed, threats are the primary > tool of law enforcement. The FBI is a law enforcement agency. Nothing to see > here. Move along. > >> Yep, that's the kind of attitude that fosters community cooperation. Yep. >> That's it... > > When people carrying guns threaten the community, it does, in fact tend to > foster community cooperation, at least at that very moment. > > Owen > > Compliance maybe, cooperation not really. --Dave
