[NA-Discuss] Unrest continues to be met with Internet lockdown

Avri Doria avri at ella.com
Wed Feb 16 19:40:06 UTC 2011


A reminder this is not  (just) about domain names.

It is about IP addresses and AS numbers ad the fact that sections of the Internet where made inaccessible.  Not just that the domain names could not be translated to IP addresses, but the addresses and the autonomous routing systems by which they were served were removed from the Internet. 

That is very much more serious that just a failure in name to IP address translation, and this is also within ALAC purview as the global reachability of all distributed addresses and AS numbers is ICANN responsibility.

One does not have to stretch at all for ICANN relevancy.


On 16 Feb 2011, at 13:36, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> On 16 February 2011 12:41, Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg at epic.org> wrote:
>> This issue is not going away. ALAC should develop a position.
> Agreed, but for this to be relevant for ICANN I would like to make such a
> position both broader and more specific:
> - broader in the sense that government meddling in the DNS goes beyond high
> profile umbrella Internet shutdowns, and definitely beyond the one-time
> circumstance in Egypt. Targeted, ongoing, content-related seizing of domains
> in the US (see other threads here related to COICA etc) also pose a
> substantial threat to the stability of the namespace. But this is not
> limited to the US; in ways this is just a continuing threat that includes
> existing filtering of domains in China and official blockage of the.il ccTLD
> in some Mideast countries.
> - more specific in that ICANN is not about all things to do with Internet
> governance. If our message is going to carry weight it has to directly
> address, and limit itself to, ICANN's own mandate. I would feel far more
> comfortable being part of an alliance on this that also perhaps includes
> ISOC and IGF, because they have the scope to address issues that are beyond
> our specific focus. (This is why I encouraged linkage with the ISOC
> statement on Egypt).
> We do have something to contribute. ICANN *claims* its actions to be
> independent of domain content, yet its shameful meddling in the .xxx issue
> (which ALAC opposed) set a poor precedent which I fear will be exploited
> again.
> I would escalate this beyond NARALO, though, for this is hardly a North
> American regional issue.
> - Evan
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list