Given the circumstances, it is probably premature to assume that many
ITU people are aware of the proposal at issue here, it indeed it is a
formal proposal at all.
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 3:45 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@bfk.de wrote:
* Richard L. Barnes:
Is this disingenuous or has the ITU
* Richard L. Barnes:
Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of netflow?
I can understand if people are not too happy with best-effort
accounting and billing.
--
Florian Weimerfwei...@bfk.de
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100
The current structures give a huge advantage to US and European
providers. The rest of the world was essentialy allowed to connect up
to the Internet provided that they paid the cost. As a result the
settlements tend to reflect precedent rather than actual benefit to
the parties.
ITU-T is not an
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
What somebody (ISOC?) should do is counter the absurd meme that
the ITU is the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.
That depends on how you parse the sentence. If you interpret 'in
charge' as
Changing the BGP specs is easy, whether they have IETF 'permission' to
do so or not. At worst just declare a BGP4, there is no real
disadvantage to doing so as the move to a different charging regime
would require all participants to upgrade in any case.
That is the place where the scheme falls
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 07:24:43AM -0800, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
(except it's not a joke)
Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm
China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its
borders, it has emerged.
On 19 dec 2009, at 01.01, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
The current structures give a huge advantage to US and European
providers.
Yes and no.
The trick here is that the question is not so simple (or the answer to the
question is not so simple). I was myself working with launching Internet in
The trick here is that the question is not so simple (or the answer to the
question is not so simple).
I was myself working with launching Internet in Europe from -87 and sure, we
had to pay quite a lot to
get our first connection to ISPs (then only in the US) so I am pretty sure I
have
On Dec 18, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
Richard == Richard L Barnes rbar...@bbn.com writes:
Richard Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard has been made to the ITU: An
On Dec 19, 2009, at 11:02 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
I don't think this idea is coming from people who don't understand the
Internet or its current economic models. I think they understand it all too
well. I think this is a thoroughly bad idea that really should be stopped
dead in its
(except it's not a joke)
Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm
China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its
borders, it has emerged.
The move would require international agreement - but it is being
discussed
On Dec 18, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
(except it's not a joke)
Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm
China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its
borders, it has emerged.
The move would require
Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that has been
made to the ITU:
An ITU spokesman said: The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP
protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard.
A proposal has been made, and is being studied, to use BGP routers to
collect traffic flow data,
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
The move would require international agreement - but it is being
discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.
Are they referring to the ITU ?
Yes. The ITU-T which is the United Nations body in charge of internet
On 12/18/2009 7:34 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
The move would require international agreement - but it is being
discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.
Are they referring to the ITU ?
Yes, however:
An ITU spokesman said: The ITU has no plans to modify the
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 10:39:03AM -0500,
Richard L. Barnes rbar...@bbn.com wrote
a message of 74 lines which said:
Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of netflow?
This is the IETF, use RFC 5101 instead :-)
___
Ietf mailing list
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 07:24:43AM -0800,
Ole Jacobsen o...@cisco.com wrote
a message of 34 lines which said:
Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm
In France (translated by me):
* Stephane Bortzmeyer:
Today, Internet is completely rotten, says Jacques Myard. We have
to nationalize this network, as the Chinese did.
FWIW, Germany has got an established legal framework for covert
keyword-based screening on all international data links.
--
Florian Weimer
Richard == Richard L Barnes rbar...@bbn.com writes:
Richard Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard has been made to the ITU: An ITU spokesman said: The ITU
Richard has no plans to modify the BGP protocol, which is not an
Richard ITU-T standard. A
On 18 dec 2009, at 17.19, Sam Hartman wrote:
What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?
Not bogus at all.
But, there is a big difference between having A Country asking for agreed upon
settlement structures and the current structure where the peers negotiate how
the money is to
On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
Richard == Richard L Barnes rbar...@bbn.com writes:
Richard Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard has been made to the ITU: An ITU spokesman said: The
ITU
Richard has no plans to modify the BGP
--On Friday, December 18, 2009 12:10 -0500 Marshall Eubanks
t...@americafree.tv wrote:
What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?
Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?
This sounds very much like the way that international long
distance used to be done. That the Internet
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
Richard == Richard L Barnes rbar...@bbn.com writes:
Richard Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard has been made to the ITU: An ITU spokesman said: The ITU
Richard has no plans to modify
This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
emergency services
This one at least we have a story on:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
On Dec 18, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
(except it's not a joke)
Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm
China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its
borders, it has emerged.
The move
On 12/18/2009 10:10 AM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
emergency services
This one at least we have a story on:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/
The emulation is perhaps better
Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 12/18/2009 10:10 AM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
emergency services
This one at least we have a story on:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/
The
Stephane Bortzmeyer allegedly wrote on 12/18/2009 10:41 EST:
In France (translated by me):
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/politique/20091217.OBS1017/un_depute_ump_propose_de_nationaliser_le_reseau_interne.html
A member of parliament (UMP, the party of the president) wants to
Van Jacobsen used to have a slide set titled Circuits: The Search for
the Cure.
See:
http://www.sigcomm.org/about/awards/sigcomm-awards/vj-sigcomm01.pdf
Bob
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Ole Jacobsen o...@cisco.com wrote:
(except it's not a joke)
As someone who has confronted some of these gentle people at IGF, let me
tell you it is not a joke.
I am always flabbergasted about what I hear, and never understand whom they
get their information from. It is often full of
Bogus because it's a bad idea or because the reporter significantly
misunderstood/misrepresented what the suggestion is actually about?
I read the story, and I think the reporter understood the discussion
pretty well, except perhaps for the distinction between capacity and
traffic.
We all know
Olivier == Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond o...@gih.com writes:
Olivier Ole Jacobsen o...@cisco.com wrote:
(except it's not a joke)
Olivier As someone who has confronted some of these gentle people
Olivier at IGF, let me tell you it is not a joke.
Olivier I am always
The work in ECRIT has certainly helped the state of deployed E911 over VoIP to
be much better today than it was in say 2000. More importantly, the progress
that the industry is making in various SDOs, including the IETF, has been the
primary factor that has caused regulators to not pass some
On 2009-12-19 06:26, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Friday, December 18, 2009 12:10 -0500 Marshall Eubanks
t...@americafree.tv wrote:
What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?
Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?
This sounds very much like the way that international long
Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote on 12/18/2009 16:11 EST:
What somebody (ISOC?) should do is counter the absurd meme that
the ITU is the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.
I suspect that came from the reporter.
___
Ietf mailing
On 18 dec 2009, at 21.55, Cullen Jennings wrote:
The work in ECRIT has certainly helped the state of deployed E911 over VoIP
to be much better today than it was in say 2000.
Sweden 911-service evolution (SIP based signalling directly to the PSAP) is
very closely following what is happening
36 matches
Mail list logo
