http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/05/09/1939222/DNSSEC-and-the-Geopoliti... Interesting talks were at http://www.sfbayisoc.org/INETSF2010...
In iks.lists.icann.at-large, you wrote:
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/05/09/1939222/DNSSEC-and-the-Geopoliti...
*hmpf* Of course DNS blocking technology seems to be stopped by DNSSEC deployment, but this view is too technical. DNS blocking is mostly unrelated to DNSSEC. There are only a few variants: 1) Users take the DNS server from the DHCP oder LCP (PPP) configuration automatically. This DNS resolver, under ISP control, can use DNSSEC to validate the responses from the Internet, but is free to deliver forged (sorry: gouvernmental edited) results to the users system, because the last mile is unprotected. Probability: 90% 2) Users choose to use an own DNS resolver without DNSSEC validation. They will not use the provider DNS, but resolve directly. So the blocking infrastructure will never harm their communication at all. Probability: 9% 3) Users choose to use an own DNS resolver with DNSSEC validation. Usually they will not use the provider DNS, but resolve directly. So the blocking infrastructure will never harm their communication at all. Probability: 1% 4) Users choose to validate DNS results themself, but stick to the ISP's servers. In this case the redirection to the blocking site will be detected as a malicous modification and none of the sites (original nor stop-page) can be reached. This scenario will occur, if direct DNS traffic is blocked by the ISP. Probability: 0% My probability estimates are nerd like ... sorry.
Has Peter Dengate Thrush been quoted accurately by the Register in this article? Is he as ICANN Chair really suggesting an International Treaty organisation to oversee the DNS? and Nuremberg trails for those countries that do bad things to it? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/dnssec_and_geo_political_implication... or is he putting out fires with gasoline? buzz buzz <->hornets nest Christian PS Thanks for pointing Franck. /C On 9 May 2010, at 21:52, Franck Martin wrote:
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/05/09/1939222/DNSSEC-and-the-Geopoliti...
Interesting talks were at http://www.sfbayisoc.org/INETSF2010... _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Interesting how you read the article... The argument if I recall, is that, our history has been of bilateral treaties between nations, moving into international treaties (think spectrum management), but sometimes nations have to find something of supranational impact like the Nuremberg trials which were (one of) the first in terms of law to bring supranational law without bilateral to international evolution (recently the international court of justice). ICANN/Internet does not allow well bi-lateral treaties reaching an international common law. You need a supranational law right from the beginning. Will governments rise to the challenge of the Internet? At the moment this particular "frontier" is at ICANN. This is my understanding, but then I can be wrong... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Larrinaga" <cdel@firsthand.net> To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Monday, 10 May, 2010 1:53:58 AM Subject: Re: [At-Large] DNSSEC and geopolitics Has Peter Dengate Thrush been quoted accurately by the Register in this article? Is he as ICANN Chair really suggesting an International Treaty organisation to oversee the DNS? and Nuremberg trails for those countries that do bad things to it? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/dnssec_and_geo_political_implication... or is he putting out fires with gasoline? buzz buzz <->hornets nest Christian PS Thanks for pointing Franck. /C
On 05/10/2010 01:53 AM, Christian Larrinaga wrote:
Has Peter Dengate Thrush been quoted accurately by the Register in this article?
Is he as ICANN Chair really suggesting an International Treaty organisation to oversee the DNS? and Nuremberg trails for those countries that do bad things to it? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/dnssec_and_geo_political_implication...
From what I read (and know about PDT) I sense that you are reading too much into the words in the article. (And I find it interesting that the author if the article is ICANN's former Kieren McCarthy.) As for the basic premise underlying PDT's comments. The net is accelerating the erosion of the nation-state system established by the treaty of Westphalia (about year 1645). The erosion first became noticeable after WW-II with the rise of multi-national corporations. The results of that erosion, the granules of sovereign authority, are not washing away and disappearing. Rather they are flowing into new organizations, such as ICANN. Unfortunately we seem to have forgotten to apply all the lessons taught by 18th century thinkers about how one creates self-constraining and self-limiting bodies of power and authority. The net (pun intended) result is that we are returning to an era of overlapping sovereigns - much as existed in renaissance Italy where temporal matters were under the local duke and spiritual matters were under the Pope. Jumping back to technology - DNSSEC does not appear to prevent the establishment of competing root systems. (And as people who have read my stuff may know, I advocate competing roots as a way out of mess surrounding new TLDs - if you are interested take a look under the "Alternative History" section of http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000331.html ) --karl--
Karl I do sort of see where this is coming from but I don't think this makes the case completely. (and I have a degree in History and spent a couple of interesting years studying under the wonderful late John Hale the political machinations of the Italian renaissance and beyond.) But as you frame it this way let me continue in the same vein. Let's just romantically propose that the era of nation states is at an end and a new sphere of global structures is being established. Let's also assume that these structures are plural. By which I mean some may be government owned and established (bilateral), some may be multi lateral (treaty organisations) some may be informal or private (secret treaty or contracts) and some may be private bodies working with public resources, in a formal structure but subject to the jurisdiction of one nation state whilst operating globally in areas of activity strung out with an increasing plethora of local laws, regulations and incumbent interests. Now the last structure looks interesting. It is not difficult to then imagine how conflicts between legal systems, and interests might place such a body outside formal international treaty structures at risk of, shall we call them systemic dilemmas? So the premise of finding a way to resolve such dilemmas is not news I think. Now if I for a rash moment use ICANN as an example of such a structure and apply the commented model. Then I don't see bottom up. I don't see consensus of interested parties. I don't see co-ordination. OK it doesn't mean they are not there in abundance beavering away in the background. But I do see imposition of a "higher authority" and the example of a treaty body or international court with legal force. A force that looks intended to be aimed at having precedence over national laws with commentary on limits to sovereignty. Ahh! Now I only have the article to go on so I was simply asking whether the article reflects what has been said. PDT may intend to put the issues up in the air to a knowledgeable crowd to see where they land. The ICANN chair needs to be able to do that without getting shot down for it. I mean there is a problem isn't there? It should be discussed. Christian P.S., Thanks your history link is priceless. On 10 May 2010, at 19:59, Karl Auerbach wrote:
On 05/10/2010 01:53 AM, Christian Larrinaga wrote:
Has Peter Dengate Thrush been quoted accurately by the Register in this article?
Is he as ICANN Chair really suggesting an International Treaty organisation to oversee the DNS? and Nuremberg trails for those countries that do bad things to it? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/dnssec_and_geo_political_implication...
From what I read (and know about PDT) I sense that you are reading too much into the words in the article. (And I find it interesting that the author if the article is ICANN's former Kieren McCarthy.)
As for the basic premise underlying PDT's comments.
The net is accelerating the erosion of the nation-state system established by the treaty of Westphalia (about year 1645). The erosion first became noticeable after WW-II with the rise of multi-national corporations.
The results of that erosion, the granules of sovereign authority, are not washing away and disappearing. Rather they are flowing into new organizations, such as ICANN. Unfortunately we seem to have forgotten to apply all the lessons taught by 18th century thinkers about how one creates self-constraining and self-limiting bodies of power and authority.
The net (pun intended) result is that we are returning to an era of overlapping sovereigns - much as existed in renaissance Italy where temporal matters were under the local duke and spiritual matters were under the Pope.
Jumping back to technology - DNSSEC does not appear to prevent the establishment of competing root systems. (And as people who have read my stuff may know, I advocate competing roots as a way out of mess surrounding new TLDs - if you are interested take a look under the "Alternative History" section of http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000331.html )
--karl--
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Karl: Thanks very much for this interesting historical perspective on Keiren's article and generated comments. As usual, it is engaging..and food for wider thought. Carlton On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:
On 05/10/2010 01:53 AM, Christian Larrinaga wrote:
Has Peter Dengate Thrush been quoted accurately by the Register in
this article?
Is he as ICANN Chair really suggesting an International Treaty
organisation to oversee the DNS? and Nuremberg trails for those countries that do bad things to it?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/dnssec_and_geo_political_implication...
From what I read (and know about PDT) I sense that you are reading too much into the words in the article. (And I find it interesting that the author if the article is ICANN's former Kieren McCarthy.)
As for the basic premise underlying PDT's comments.
The net is accelerating the erosion of the nation-state system established by the treaty of Westphalia (about year 1645). The erosion first became noticeable after WW-II with the rise of multi-national corporations.
The results of that erosion, the granules of sovereign authority, are not washing away and disappearing. Rather they are flowing into new organizations, such as ICANN. Unfortunately we seem to have forgotten to apply all the lessons taught by 18th century thinkers about how one creates self-constraining and self-limiting bodies of power and authority.
The net (pun intended) result is that we are returning to an era of overlapping sovereigns - much as existed in renaissance Italy where temporal matters were under the local duke and spiritual matters were under the Pope.
Jumping back to technology - DNSSEC does not appear to prevent the establishment of competing root systems. (And as people who have read my stuff may know, I advocate competing roots as a way out of mess surrounding new TLDs - if you are interested take a look under the "Alternative History" section of http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000331.html )
--karl--
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- +========+++++++++++++++====== Carlton A Samuels Strategies for Education Technologies and Curriculum Development, Process Engineering & Improvement, ICT Policy, Internet Governance
participants (5)
-
Carlton Samuels -
Christian Larrinaga -
Franck Martin -
Karl Auerbach -
Lutz Donnerhacke