<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#333333" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
On Monday 12 December 2011 11:10 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4EE593D3.9030706@cavebear.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 12/10/2011 06:44 AM, parminder wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">We need countervailing systems of political and democratic power for the
global Internet.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
You already have them.
With regard to DNS, any person, or group of persons, is free to set up
their own DNS roots,</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Karl, <br>
<br>
The unfortunate problem is that a non CIRs issue of global governance
(here, in my quoted email, private and extra territorial IP
enforcement) so often gets responded to by a CIR management solution. I
have endless (non) debates with McTim over similar lines. Why should
discussions on so many other more important issues of global Internet
governance remain forever hostage to the logics and sensitivities of
CIR management space. <br>
<br>
Even if I were to accept your argument, the issue remains that unlike
DNS, a group of people cannot set up their own IP regime that is immune
to IP regimes that are otherwise operating over them, de jure or de
facto. I have asked for countervailing systems of political and
democratic power specifically against US's unilateral enforcement of
its law over other countries. I dont see how this problem gets solved
by your response.<br>
<br>
As for CIR governance, which I insist is a rather different kind of
issue: In fact, perhaps unlike you, and I respect your views, I do not
have any problem with a single root and a single DNS, or even for ICANN
to be managing it. I only have a problem with UN gov oversight of ICANN
and applicaiton of US law to ICANN. Just that part should move to an
international jurisdiction, with nothing else changing substantially.
This is a simple, clear and, in my view, wholly reasonable demand.<br>
<br>
We all know that sooner or later, a US court is going to issue a
direction to ICANN to act in a certain way, in pursuance of upholding
US law in one of the thousand possible areas that can cause such an
order, and ICANN will have to do it, and all the feigned innocence of
ICANN's globalness and neutrality will be gone up in thin air in a
moment. And, hopefully later than sooner, US government itself will be
caught into a high stake security 'situation' whereby it will just have
to do something vis a vis the CIRs that it exercises control over, in
negation of what it likes to make everyone believe that it will never
do. I have no idea why we must all wait for that time to scramble to
solve the problem that we know is already there.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4EE593D3.9030706@cavebear.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> populate them with whatever top level domains
(TLD)s they like, provision their own DNS servers, and point their
computers at those servers. And DNSSEC will still work.
As for IP addresses - this is a bit more expensive: Anyone can
establish their own routing systems with their own links and routers and
using their own distinct IPv4 (or IPv6) address space. Connectivity to
"the rest of the world" would be via application level gateways/proxies
- most modern protocols don't mind proxies or application level gateways.
Of course these may be exactly the same paths that those who wish to
exert increased control will chose to follow - it is an attractive path
to the forces of control because those proxies and application level
gateways represent points of control traffic - places to monitor, places
to limit, places to tax, places to block.
(Moreover, in these times of economic distress, this path also means
that existing investments in IPv4 equipment can remain in place and by
re-using the entire IPv4 address space as many times as one wants it
eliminates the IPv4 address exhaustion issue.)
What I am saying is that there are forces, from both sides of the
"liberty" equation, that are combining to push today's singular
end-to-end internet into an internet of internets.
--karl--
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>