[At-Large] RES: Proposed statement of the ALAC regarding the current situation in Egypt

Adam Peake ajp at glocom.ac.jp
Wed Feb 2 05:01:05 UTC 2011

>On 1 Feb 2011, at 20:12, Vanda UOL wrote:
>>  I can endorse it. More than this is out of the ICANN´s scope.
>While I endorsed the statement, I do not believe 
>that more is out of ICANN's scope, though I 
>understand it is out of some people's comfort 
>It may be politically difficult for some, and it 
>may be contrary to the political aims of others, 
>but responding to this sort of attack on the 
>Internet is what ICANN's scope as a steward is 
>all about.  ICANN should not remain silent on 
>the issue of kill switches that render the 
>network unstable.  ICANN should not just bury 
>its head when national actions cause properly 
>assigned addresses and ASs to become unreachable 
>because of political action, no matter who 
>throws the switch or why.  Whether it is Egypt's 
>action last week, or US legislation later this 
>year, rendering parts of the network 
>inaccessible is something that ICANN cannot 
>allow to happen while standing silently and idly 


I think I agree with you.

Anyway, a question from technical ignorance (as 
usual :-)). Are there technical implications for 
the rest of the Internet to causing ASs to become 
unreachable?  The ISOC note covers some issues, 
but from ICANN/IANA perspective is this a bad 
thing.  If yes, ICANN should comment, as should 

In new TLD discussions around "offensive strings" 
often hear comments suggesting governments that 
don't like a tld could simply block it.  I had 
heard, and this is really my question, that while 
blocking a TLD (cc or g) now has no technical 
impact on the global Internet, once all TLDs are 
DNSSEC signed such blocking might cause problems. 
I do not know the nature of the problems, 
significant or not (or even if real, I  may have 
just misunderstood something).  If there are 
technical implications now to actions such as 
Egypt's, or will be in the new future when tlds 
are DNSSEC signed, then it's within ICANN's scope.

Clarification/correction appreciated!



>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 mailing list