[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

BCP38 - Internet Death Penalty

----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net>

> On Mar 26, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Jay Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
> > The problem here is, of course, one of externalities and the Common
> > Good, hard sales to make in a business environment.
> "Common Good" situations are readily dealt with, but generally not on a
> voluntary basis. You establish how the resource is to be managed, and
> then you put in place mechanisms to deal with enforcement. The problem
> is that en-force-ment contains "force", which is something that we
> really don't want anyone (or set of anyones) using except "governments"
> (which in our social constructs are the only ones supposed to be telling one
> party under penalty of force not to do something otherwise in its best
> interest.)

Basically, though there are lots of other things that are close.

> The problem, of course, with asking governments for help is that the
> output often does not resemble anything related to the original problem
> statement and can make the situation worse...

Yup, a problem which is indeed perennial, and which we mentioned in an
earlier set of exchanges.

> If we had truly global operational best practices for the Internet (ones
> that went through a fairly well-defined policy development process which
> included multiple operator forums from around the globe) then you might
> have a solid chance of producing output which avoided the various anti-
> competitive aspects, and yet were a reasonable basis for governments
> to then step up and indicate should be required for ISPs in their
> operations.
> It wouldn't take very many governments asking "How do I reduce SPAM
> and DDoS attacks?" and hearing back "Please require ISPs to adhere to this
> Best Common Operating Practice Foo-01" before it became common
> practice.

Indeed, but I have an even better example of how that's already done, that
is probably pertinent.

The National Electric Code is assimilated law now, I think, in every
state in the US.  It is promulgated by the National Fire Protection 
Association, which is a standards organization originally started by 
insurors to reduce their exposure and expenses; by professional consensus,
they have become, effectively, a lawmaking body.

So they're not the government, they're subject-matter experts, technically
competent to have opinions, and their opinions are assimilated into 
controlling law.

Is BCP38 *not* well enough though out even for large and medium sized 
carriers to adopt as contractual language, much less for FCC or someone to
impose upon them?  If so, we should work on it further.

If not, do carriers need to be threatened with its imposition to get them
to adopt it contractually?

-- jra
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA               #natog                      +1 727 647 1274