[At-Large] Libya terminating unacceptable .ly domains
isolatedn at gmail.com
Fri Oct 8 12:03:11 UTC 2010
Dear Karl Auerbach,
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 12:10 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> > You speak as if this hasn't already started.
> The recent brouhaha about .xxx was driven in large part by some very
> conservative religious groups in the US who lobbied the Bush
> administration which, in turn, put pressure on the US Dep't of Commerce,
> who, in turn ... well, we all saw the results.
> But the net has never been seamless. My private net is not open to
> everyone. I would suspect that pretty much everyone's home net is
> closed to outsiders. Corporate and military chunks of the net are also
> pretty well closed up.
One's Home network, a military network or a Corporate Network are in the
Intranet realm, these are networks that by definition, do not want to be
part of the Internet. It is another matter if that happens to National
> It is a fantasy that the net ever was, is, or will be an open field in
> which everyone can contact anyone and in which anyone can prance freely
> to any part.
> The end-to-end principle is a fading aspiration, not a reflection of
> present or past reality.
> And the chunking of the net is happening in many ways beyond DNS. IPv6
> is going to chop the net into two distinct nets running side-by-side.
> NATs and Application Level Gateways carve us up further. Rules that
> require or deny cryptography (e.g. the Blackberry mess) are going to
> divide us in yet another dimension. Private interconnects are going to
> create a caste system in which large corporate interests will be able to
> provide their most favored users with a better internet experience than
> received by the independent internet user.
> The dimensionality of separations is increasing even more - for
> instance, those who refuse to use Facebook are divided from those who
> do. Yesterday's XKCD drawing of the continents and nations of the net
> is very illustrative of the growing boundaries.
> My own sense is that rather than wringing hands over the divisions that
> we ought to aspire to create processes and institutions that show how
> those divisions are not merely silly but also counterproductive and
> ultimately ineffective.
> > Then we must allow hundreds of gTLDs to blossom in their place :-)
> Yes!!! (But why merely hundreds? I'll raise you by 2 decimal orders of
> magnitude a year. ;-)
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large