Robert Guerra wrote:
The recent exchange on and about the fall ICANN meeting in Egypt was informative and allowed me to see to what extent (or not) it is possible to have a larger discussion about the broad issue of Internet Freedom affects millions of internet users.
Unfortunately, the process of your education has caused much collateral damage, thanks to the condescending and paternalistic tone you have used to frame this "debate". Unfortunately little has changed, despite this new awareness. There is no linkage between individuals' concern/passion about Internet freedom issues and the requirement to use ICANN as the conduit to channel that emotion.
As a more specific - DNS centric focus has been requested, then let me suggest that Internet Censorship has the unintended consequence of affecting the security and stability of the DNS not only at a national level, but internationally (see ref below). Let's not make this into more than it was. It was not internet censorship per-se that affected DNS, just Pakistan's botched implementation of it (or, to be specific, one ISP's botch).
There are DNS errors all over the place. Some are more serious than others, and few are censorship-related. If there is a problem it is one of general DNS reliability, and need not be linked into something outside of ICANN's realm such as censorship. Traditionally -- and in this case as well -- the Internet has found ways of routing around such damage. Is this something that DNSSEC can address?
1. That ICANN should propose a study be conducted by SSAC, in collaboration with leading censorship researchers on the effects on internet censorship on the operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet.
I find it interesting that SSAC does not independently see this as something worth investigating, especially since you're already involved with that group...
I hope this specific proposal can be supported by ALS's and the ALAC on or before the Paris ICANN meeting in June.
Opposed by me. If SSAC doesn't independently see the link I see no reason to force it to do so, any more than I would want SSAC to ask the Board to direct ALAC to do something _we_ did not believe required attention. Please stop this nonsense before you run out of backdoors through which to attempt injection of non-ICANN agendas into our already-loaded TODO list. And you owe Veni a public apology. - Evan