Perfil da pessoa

Pessoa

Randy Bush

O papel público, as decisões ou a participação jurídica documentados de Randy Bush podem influenciar investimentos em redes, acesso ao mercado, políticas de infraestrutura ou limites de responsabilidade; este dossiê separa os registros citados da verificação do cargo atual.

Os dados disponíveis abrangem Cargos: Executive Board Member (RIPE NCC).

Mais recente 2026-09-28

Cargos: Executive Board Member (RIPE NCC)

Evidências

Papel público: As fontes públicas citadas identificam Randy Bush como uma pessoa ligada a decisões, litígios, governança ou operações relevantes para a infraestrutura da internet; o cargo e a afiliação atuais ainda precisam ser verificados.

Detalhes relacionados

Randy Bush e o Caso Operacional da Segurança de Roteamento
Suporta o perfil público do diretório, o limite de evidências do artigo e o contexto operacional.
evidência pública
Randy Bush e o Caso Operacional da Segurança de Roteamento
Suporta o perfil público do diretório, o limite de evidências do artigo e o contexto operacional.
evidência pública
Randy Bush e o Caso Operacional da Segurança de Roteamento
Suporta o perfil público do diretório, o limite de evidências do artigo e o contexto operacional.
evidência pública
Randy Bush e o Caso Operacional da Segurança de Roteamento
Suporta o perfil público do diretório, o limite de evidências do artigo e o contexto operacional.
evidência pública
Randy Bush e o Caso Operacional da Segurança de Roteamento
Suporta o perfil público do diretório, o limite de evidências do artigo e o contexto operacional.
evidência pública

Última atualização: 2026-09-28

Cargos

Role:Executive Board Member (RIPE NCC)Ainda não avaliado

Fatos com fonte

Participação em políticas RIR

3RIRs com participação

8Políticas com participação

13Mensagens de política

8 de mar. de 2002Primeira participação

11 de mar. de 2009Última participação

prop-014A proposal to lower the IPv4 minimum allocation size and initialallocation criteria in the AsiaPacificregionOposição · 3 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma avaliação de coerência validada
prop-033End site assignment policy for IPv6Desconhecida · 0 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
prop-050IPv4 address transfersDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
ARIN-2002-1Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPAApoio · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
The retained message explicitly welcomes cleaning up lame reverse-DNS delegations and proposes operational checks and visible removal records. With only one message here, the evidence establishes that position but cannot establish whether it changed over time.
Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPA
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The retained message explicitly welcomes cleaning up lame reverse-DNS delegations and proposes operational checks and visible removal records. With only one message here, the evidence establishes that position but cannot establish whether it changed over time.
Condições: Assessment is limited to the retained March 2002 contribution.
8 de mar. de 2002
yes!!! at last, something to move towards cleaning up bad data and keeping it clean. thank you!
Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPA · 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure
Avaliação: Coerente · Supporting removal of broken DNS delegations is compatible with asking a new internal-address design to avoid unreachable DNS data and related operational failures. Both contributions consider effects on working systems; their different policy subjects do not make the stances contradictory.
Condições: This is a comparison of the stated operational concerns, not a claim that both policies have the same remedy or that Bush supported every detail.
8 de mar. de 2002
removed. whois cruisin' humans are not hurt by lamers, systems using dns are.
21 de abr. de 2006
o dns entries with unreachables on the rhs o traceroutes through infrastructure o dns dynupd for unreachables
ARIN-2002-2Experimental Internet Resource AllocationsApoio com mudanças · 2 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Coerente
Bush first asks that experimental allocations use the IETF consensus process rather than a narrower experimental-RFC condition. His follow-up clarifies that this concerns the process used to evaluate proposals, not who may originate them. The clarification preserves his earlier condition.
Experimental Internet Resource Allocations
Avaliação: Coerente · Bush first asks that experimental allocations use the IETF consensus process rather than a narrower experimental-RFC condition. His follow-up clarifies that this concerns the process used to evaluate proposals, not who may originate them. The clarification preserves his earlier condition.
Condições: He expressly speaks as an IETF member, not as its representative. · The record does not establish an IAB decision or restrict proposal authorship to IETF members.
16 de nov. de 2002
refers to rfc 2434 section 2 and uses the phrase "ietf consensus process."
19 de nov. de 2002
the issue is what standards organization's process is used to process a proposal. in that case, indeed i am saying it should be ietf's. note that this is not who may think of proposals.
Experimental Internet Resource Allocations · 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The requirement for an IETF consensus process in experimental allocations does not supply a position on the design merits of internal-address micro-allocations. The latter messages raise engineering questions; the evidence supports neither a conflict between these positions nor a common final endorsement.
Condições: Standards-process authority and address-design consequences are distinct questions.
ARIN-2004-32004-3: Global Addresses for Private Network Inter-ConnectivityDesconhecida · 3 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
ARIN-2006-22006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal InfrastructureDesconhecida · 2 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Coerente
The question about binding locators to identifiers and the later questions about leakage, DNS and diagnostics address complementary design consequences. Neither message states a blanket vote on the proposal; no contradictory position is expressed in these two messages.
2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure
Avaliação: Coerente · The question about binding locators to identifiers and the later questions about leakage, DNS and diagnostics address complementary design consequences. Neither message states a blanket vote on the proposal; no contradictory position is expressed in these two messages.
Condições: Technical questions are not an endorsement or rejection of the whole proposal.
21 de abr. de 2006
is this another binding of locators to identifiers?
21 de abr. de 2006
could folk please explain how these various suggestions differ from 1918 on the dimensions which seem operationally annoying today?
Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPA · 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure
Avaliação: Coerente · Supporting removal of broken DNS delegations is compatible with asking a new internal-address design to avoid unreachable DNS data and related operational failures. Both contributions consider effects on working systems; their different policy subjects do not make the stances contradictory.
Condições: This is a comparison of the stated operational concerns, not a claim that both policies have the same remedy or that Bush supported every detail.
8 de mar. de 2002
removed. whois cruisin' humans are not hurt by lamers, systems using dns are.
2005-01HD-ratio ProposalDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada

Participação em políticas RIR

3RIRs com participação

8Políticas com participação

13Mensagens de política

8 de mar. de 2002Primeira participação

11 de mar. de 2009Última participação

prop-014A proposal to lower the IPv4 minimum allocation size and initialallocation criteria in the AsiaPacificregionOposição · 3 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma avaliação de coerência validada

prop-033End site assignment policy for IPv6Desconhecida · 0 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada

prop-050IPv4 address transfersDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada

ARIN-2002-1Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPAApoio · 1 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência

The retained message explicitly welcomes cleaning up lame reverse-DNS delegations and proposes operational checks and visible removal records. With only one message here, the evidence establishes that position but cannot establish whether it changed over time.

Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPA

Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The retained message explicitly welcomes cleaning up lame reverse-DNS delegations and proposes operational checks and visible removal records. With only one message here, the evidence establishes that position but cannot establish whether it changed over time.

Condições: Assessment is limited to the retained March 2002 contribution.

8 de mar. de 2002
yes!!! at last, something to move towards cleaning up bad data and keeping it clean. thank you!

Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPA · 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure

Avaliação: Coerente · Supporting removal of broken DNS delegations is compatible with asking a new internal-address design to avoid unreachable DNS data and related operational failures. Both contributions consider effects on working systems; their different policy subjects do not make the stances contradictory.

Condições: This is a comparison of the stated operational concerns, not a claim that both policies have the same remedy or that Bush supported every detail.

8 de mar. de 2002
removed. whois cruisin' humans are not hurt by lamers, systems using dns are.

21 de abr. de 2006
o dns entries with unreachables on the rhs o traceroutes through infrastructure o dns dynupd for unreachables

ARIN-2002-2Experimental Internet Resource AllocationsApoio com mudanças · 2 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Coerente

Bush first asks that experimental allocations use the IETF consensus process rather than a narrower experimental-RFC condition. His follow-up clarifies that this concerns the process used to evaluate proposals, not who may originate them. The clarification preserves his earlier condition.

Experimental Internet Resource Allocations

Avaliação: Coerente · Bush first asks that experimental allocations use the IETF consensus process rather than a narrower experimental-RFC condition. His follow-up clarifies that this concerns the process used to evaluate proposals, not who may originate them. The clarification preserves his earlier condition.

Condições: He expressly speaks as an IETF member, not as its representative. · The record does not establish an IAB decision or restrict proposal authorship to IETF members.

16 de nov. de 2002
refers to rfc 2434 section 2 and uses the phrase "ietf consensus process."

19 de nov. de 2002
the issue is what standards organization's process is used to process a proposal. in that case, indeed i am saying it should be ietf's. note that this is not who may think of proposals.

Experimental Internet Resource Allocations · 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure

Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The requirement for an IETF consensus process in experimental allocations does not supply a position on the design merits of internal-address micro-allocations. The latter messages raise engineering questions; the evidence supports neither a conflict between these positions nor a common final endorsement.

Condições: Standards-process authority and address-design consequences are distinct questions.

ARIN-2004-32004-3: Global Addresses for Private Network Inter-ConnectivityDesconhecida · 3 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada

ARIN-2006-22006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal InfrastructureDesconhecida · 2 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Coerente

The question about binding locators to identifiers and the later questions about leakage, DNS and diagnostics address complementary design consequences. Neither message states a blanket vote on the proposal; no contradictory position is expressed in these two messages.

2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure

Avaliação: Coerente · The question about binding locators to identifiers and the later questions about leakage, DNS and diagnostics address complementary design consequences. Neither message states a blanket vote on the proposal; no contradictory position is expressed in these two messages.

Condições: Technical questions are not an endorsement or rejection of the whole proposal.

21 de abr. de 2006
is this another binding of locators to identifiers?

21 de abr. de 2006
could folk please explain how these various suggestions differ from 1918 on the dimensions which seem operationally annoying today?

Lame Delegations in IN-ADDR.ARPA · 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure

Condições: This is a comparison of the stated operational concerns, not a claim that both policies have the same remedy or that Bush supported every detail.

8 de mar. de 2002
removed. whois cruisin' humans are not hurt by lamers, systems using dns are.

2005-01HD-ratio ProposalDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada