------- start of forwarded message ------- Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 01:31:36 -0400 From: Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Esther Dyson: Queen of The World Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Organization: TELECOM Digest Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Approved: [comp.dcom.telecom/995f215e8f5dbe692bb649cbc77c5ed2] X-URL: http://telecom-digest.org/ X-Submissions-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Administrivia-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 19, Issue 386, Message 2 of 8 Lines: 99 Xref: news3.best.com comp.dcom.telecom:23966 On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 03:53:17 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Well, some folks are asking, you've created a rule, and a way to > enforce that rule, so haven't you actually built both a law and an > enforcement mechanism? And if you have a law against cyber-squatting, > with a virtual "death penalty" (taking away a name someone is using > effectively removes them from the web) why not apply it against other > forms of behavior we don't like? > Please, follow that last link, read what's behind it, and > tremble. You've got one law, you've got a process, and you've got a > sentence. It was all done with the mildest of intentions. But what > you've also got there is the beginnings of a world government, which > can enforce all kinds of rules simply by changing the contract you > sign when you apply for a domain name. With all due respect, I believe Jay has cause-and-effect backwards here. More later on in the message. > And if ICANN won't do it, cyber-vigilantes will. > If ICANN chose it could ban pornography, simply by stripping such > sites of their names, it could enforce product safety standards, > prevent the online manipulation of stocks, and stop hate speech in its > tracks. By simply denying names to those who violate whatever > strictures it chose, ICANN could make the Internet a pure and > beautiful place, where no one dared violate any law for fear of > virtual death! Jay believes that ICANN can usher in one world government by such a grip on the internet. Actually, it would require one world government in the first place in order to implement such total control. That's what I meant by cause-and-effect being backwards here. The only reason the current system works as well as it does is because "everybody" co-operates (sort of). Zone files don't accomplish much by simply sitting on ICANN's computers. They have to be downloaded by authoratative servers, who allow other servers to to download from them, etc, and eventually your ISP's nameserver downloads at least a portion of the zone files. Assume that ICANN decides its "the info-highway, my way, or the doorway". Assuming they can survive court challenges in the US, their "new and improved" system will affect all the ISP's who continue to co-operate with them. Nothing to prevent a bunch of ISP's, or for that matter, a bunch of countries, from getting together and setting up their own master server(s), and disseminating their zone files. So your ISP doesn't subscribe to them? You can always hardcode the nameserver IP address into your dial-up settings. Granted, using a nameserver on the other side of the planet will slow things down for you, but it will still work. And in a worst-case scenario http://208.31.42.81 will still reach Pat's web site<g>. In case you think this is a pipe dream, remember how the spam blacklists DSSL/DUL/IMRSS/ORBS/RRSS work. You're effectively using an auxilary zone file. Consider a spam received via an open relay recently. With some ugly procmail code I've implemented, I can spawn nslookup and check whether 194.184.72.2 is in the RRSS list. Note that the dotted quad is reversed. This not a typo. > /user/.6/wa/waltdnes >nslookup 2.72.184.194.relays.radparker.com > Server: ns1.interlog.com > Address: 198.53.145.18 > Non-authoritative answer: > Name: 2.72.184.194.relays.radparker.com > Address: 127.0.0.2 This answer came from my default nameserver, i.e. my ISP's machine. If my ISP's nameserver had trouble with the lookup, I could always the master server of the database. > /user/.6/wa/waltdnes >nslookup 2.72.184.194.relays.radparker.com >some.other.server.com > Server: some.other.server.com > Address: 10.11.12.13 > Name: 2.72.184.194.relays.radparker.com > Address: 127.0.0.2 This is not recommended, because it defeats the whole load- sharing philosophy behind the current nslookup paradigm. The point I'm trying to make is that from here it's a small step to setting up a competitive nameserver hierarchy. Logically similar to getting a different 411 operator, depending on which competitive local carrier you subscribe to. If things get to the point where it's illegal to use an unapproved nameservers anywhere on the planet, then we'll already have one world government. Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> procmail spamfilter http://www.interlog.com/~waltdnes/spamdunk/spamdunk.htm ------- end of forwarded message -------
