Re: Shaping the Future of ICP-2: Community Input Extended to December 2024

[Noah <noah () neo co tz>]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024, 23:48 William Herrin, <bill () herrin us> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 12:39 PM Noah <noah () 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.


That doesn't make sense. Are we trying to imply that the RIR's are a
geographic monopoly?

What makes an RIR? Is it, its administrators/managers of the registry or is
it, its resource members and other stakeholders?

Every system has its own modus operandi. Last I checked, they are member
based and rules of engagement are set by the members. If members want
change in price, there is a process. One of which includes change of
leadership with new mandate such as review of pricing etc.

Noah