Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And how. More worrisome - to my way of thinking - is that the gateways would provide convenient chokepoints for government to eavesdrop and corporations to add charges. Not conducive to the free exchange of data.
(One could argue that the Great Firewall of China is an attempt at doing just this, actually.)
Ironically by the US handing over control to the UN you are in fact assisting that.
What is really gained by the US relinquishing control?
And how. More worrisome - to my way of thinking - is that the gateways would provide convenient chokepoints for government to eavesdrop and corporations to add charges. Not conducive to the free exchange of data.
(One could argue that the Great Firewall of China is an attempt at doing just this, actually.)
So your concern is the sovereignty of other countries to regulate their own networks?
I am not concerned with other countries, that is the concern of the peoples within them. Who am I to dictate that those in other countries should follow my cultural standards?
We have no business in regulating the world. Any country that would individually regulate itself into such means will find it quickly becomes obsolete within the worlds technology and commerce. If a country chooses such a handicap, who are you to tell them otherwise?
The free exchange of data is not a trump card to ignore the sovereignty of nations. Such bravado is how world wars are created.
So your concern is the sovereignty of other countries to regulate their own networks?
Nah. I'm concerned with ICANN and other standardization bodies losing their status as neutral arbiters. I fear it would lead to a fractured Internet and I consider that a much worse risk than pretty much any skullduggery that an international ICANN could conceivably come up with.
In the context of the ICANN debate, the options were pretty much to either let ICANN go international or lose ICANN's status as an authority. I think the latter would be the worse outcome. For the Internet as a whole, not any particular country.
Nah. I'm concerned with ICANN and other standardization bodies losing their status as neutral arbiters.
Yet as it stands they are governed buy US law which is a neutral arbiter as it protects each individuals liberty in such situations. To pass it on to a world body only endangers such by allowing elements which do not respect liberty to rule. This is the center issue. As it is now, the US being the arbiter insures that rights of all registers are held to the Constitution and protected by our own governments laws. This is not the case when it passes to a world judicatory or council.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
I fear it would lead to a fractured Internet and I consider that a much worse risk than pretty much any skulduggery that an international ICANN could conceivably come up with.
You would prefer the comfort of one tyrant than the chaos that may exist by individual sovereigns? No offense, but you do not sound like the Internet professionals I know, but then security professionals are the element to which I am privy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
In the context of the ICANN debate, the options were pretty much to either let ICANN go international or lose ICANN's status as an authority. I think the latter would be the worse outcome. For the Internet as a whole, not any particular country.
The only ones who thought such were those who demanded control. Anyone in the industry knows that control is a political motive and that innovation and practicality defines acceptance if we are truly seeking adherence to progress.
I like the concept of standards, but they are not mandated authorities, to approve with forced adherence of such is to dismiss the process of innovation, but then again... politics were never interested in such matters.
I look at what I type and what you take away, and it appears my power of communication aren't sufficient to convey my point. Too bad.
I think I understand what you are saying, I just don't agree. You seem to imply that the Internet will become less functional than it is now by not having a defined power to institute the standards to all.
This won't limit access to areas of the Internet if another country chooses to adopt its own standard. The entire technology of the Internet is a designed around the concept of translations between various protocols. Each country adapting its own standard would not result in a fracture, there would just need to be translation mechanisms between each countries own standards to provide communication. This would be no different than a basic redistribution configuration between networking protocols or a concept similar to NAT.
The point is, standards are great if they are functional and serve the best interest of each individual participant, but often there are times when a standard favors a given concept to which is not in line with a particular interest. This is why we find proprietary adaptations that are developed because they better fit the individual.
So I don't think the Internet will become any more fractured than it already is. If your point is to suggest that some countries will refuse to play ball, being secretive to their own standards limiting access, well... they already do such through packet filtering and shaping among many similar controlling concepts.
By the way, if you are worried about losing me technically, I can assure you this will not be the case. So explain as you feel you can, I will catch on.
Xi repeated China's pledge to "promote equitable global internet governance" while upholding "cyber sovereignty", or the right of countries to determine how they want to manage the internet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
