[ianatransition] Disaster scenarios (was Re: Jurisdiction)

Barry Shein bzs at world.std.com
Tue Aug 5 19:07:48 UTC 2014


I guess what I'm thinking during all of your scenario:

  But what if the court is right (and IANA is wrong)?

Perhaps "right" is too strong a term but courts tend to lay out their
reasoning in decisions and even if you might wish they'd come to a
different decision that doesn't necessarily mean: To The Barricades!

Even if the decision represents an inconvenience.

For example (oh boy) a lot of people didn't like courts ordering
school busing to achieve integration, many predicted all sorts of dire
things. There were some nasty protests but by and large people went
along even if they hated it.

And we're talking about...an IP address relocation?

Issues generally go to court because they couldn't be settled by other
means.

One could say most court cases represent a failure by the parties
involved to resolve a matter so one or more seeks the authority of the
court.

They have decided instead to rely on the kindness of strangers.

Or that's how it's always felt to me when I've been involved.

I guess I'm having a problem with the whole tone here.

Exactly what apotheosis has promoted the staff and processes of IANA
et al superior to the courts?

And for that matter any court. Merely changing venue doesn't make one
immune to all possible juridical proceedings, it only changes the
jurisdiction.

On August 4, 2014 at 17:36 ajs at anvilwalrusden.com (Andrew Sullivan) wrote:
 > Hi,
 > 
 > On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 04:59:22PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
 > > 
 > > If I were a network appliance manufacturer either I adhere to
 > > published standards/registries or should my finances suffer due to
 > > this my investors would have good reason to sue and likely win
 > > something, perhaps removal of officers or even financial remuneration.
 > 
 > Yes.  But I don't think we're talking about single actors in the
 > hypothetical cases we were talking about.  That appears to be what
 > you're describing above, and it's certainly not what I meant.
 > 
 > Let's return to the example posited earlier: some US court orders
 > ICANN to reallocate an address (contrary to some policy).  The only
 > way ICANN can actually do that is to withdraw the entire block it
 > allocated to the RIR in question.  Note that, as a practical matter,
 > the address would probably be allocated outside ARIN's service area,
 > because if it weren't, the order would presumably be against ARIN
 > instead. 
 > 
 > I believe that, under those circumstances, there is a significant
 > probability that the RIRs would decide to ignore the then-current
 > implementer of the IANA address policies, and that LIRs and ISPs and
 > so on would by and large follow the RIRs (or, I guess we might say in
 > this case, the NRO) in the new policies, despite what IANA had to say
 > on the matter.  
 > 
 > This would be, without any doubt, an extremely bad outcome for
 > everyone, in that there'd be a period of global confusion (and
 > whatever block of addresses was ordered transferred would be a total
 > mess).  But it seems to me that the end result would almost certainly
 > be that people would stop using the IANA co-ordination mechanism,
 > because it had become corruped by an external power beyond the control
 > of participants.  People would come up with a different answer, and
 > work out how to co-ordinate it, or else we'd lose the Internet.
 > 
 > There is the possibility, of course, that the same US court would
 > order US ISPs and so on to use the US-based IANA and everyone else
 > would ditch it.  This would also be very bad, in that there'd be the
 > US-model Internet and the everywhere-else model.  It would also be
 > entertaining (in the way disaster movies are) to see such a rule
 > enforced, but I can imagine someone attempting to do it anyway. 
 > 
 > Now, I'm aware that others think that we need some mechanism that will
 > guarantee these sorts of disaster can't happen.  I have argued that I
 > think that desire can't actually be satisfied (I'm not going to
 > rehearse that argument, because I said I wouldn't).
 > 
 > Best regards,
 > 
 > A
 > 
 > -- 
 > Andrew Sullivan
 > ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
 > _______________________________________________
 > ianatransition mailing list
 > ianatransition at icann.org
 > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*



More information about the ianatransition mailing list