Re: ICANN Response (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

[Sean Donelan]

https://www.icrc.org/en

Convention (V) respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and 
Persons in Case of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.


CHAPTER I : THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL POWERS - ART. 8.

Art. 8. A neutral Power is not called upon to forbid or restrict the use 
on behalf of the belligerents of telegraph or telephone cables or of 
wireless telegraphy apparatus belonging to it or to companies or private 
individuals.



CHAPTER I : THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL POWERS - ART. 9.

Art. 9. Every measure of restriction or prohibition taken by a neutral 
Power in regard to the matters referred to in Articles 7 and 8

must be impartially applied by it to both belligerents.

A neutral Power must see to the same obligation being observed by 
companies or private individuals owning telegraph or telephone cables or 
wireless telegraphy apparatus.


[not an international relations lawyer]

Re: ICANN Response (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

[Brian R]

John,

Thank you for these.  I'm glad to hear the stance on both of these.

Brian

From: NANOG  on behalf of 
John Curran 
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 5:04 AM
To: Nanog 
Subject: ICANN Response (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

ICANN response request from the Ukraine regarding various DNS interventions – 
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/marby-to-fedorov-02mar22-en.pdf

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


On 2 Mar 2022, at 1:01 AM, John Curran 
mailto:jcur...@arin.net>> wrote:

Regarding the portion of the request to the RIPE NCC to withdraw the relevant 
Russia registered IP address blocks, it appears that the RIPE NCC has 
reiterated their position on such disputes -
https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/announcements/ripe-ncc-executive-board-resolution-on-provision-of-critical-services

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

On 1 Mar 2022, at 3:25 AM, Ryan Hamel 
mailto:administra...@rkhtech.org>> wrote:

It’s already spread to the news - 
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ukraine-icann-russia-internet-runet-disconnection-1314278/

Ryan

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech@nanog.org>>
 On Behalf Of George Herbert
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:17 AM
To: Nanog mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Ukraine request yikes

Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

Seems… instability creating…


-george

Sent from my iPhone

Re: ICANN Response (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

[Jason Kuehl]

Yep, I completely agree. I also think if they had done anything else, it
would have been a reputation-ending.

On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 8:19 AM Jorge Amodio  wrote:

>
> I believe it is a proper response, besides that it is not right for ICANN
> to get in the middle of this type of conflict, in situations like this,
> increasing the flow of real information counters the flow of misinformation.
>
> -J
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 7:05 AM John Curran  wrote:
>
>> ICANN response request from the Ukraine regarding various DNS
>> interventions –
>> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/marby-to-fedorov-02mar22-en.pdf
>>
>> FYI,
>> /John
>>
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>
>>
>> On 2 Mar 2022, at 1:01 AM, John Curran  wrote:
>>
>> Regarding the portion of the request to the RIPE NCC to withdraw the
>> relevant Russia registered IP address blocks, it appears that the RIPE NCC
>> has reiterated their position on such disputes -
>>
>>
>> https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/announcements/ripe-ncc-executive-board-resolution-on-provision-of-critical-services
>>
>>
>> FYI,
>> /John
>>
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>
>> On 1 Mar 2022, at 3:25 AM, Ryan Hamel  wrote:
>>
>> It’s already spread to the news -
>> https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ukraine-icann-russia-internet-runet-disconnection-1314278/
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf Of 
>> *George
>> Herbert
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:17 AM
>> *To:* Nanog 
>> *Subject:* Ukraine request yikes
>>
>> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
>> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21
>>
>> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS
>>
>> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off,
>> revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
>>
>> Seems… instability creating…
>>
>>
>> -george
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
Sincerely,

Jason W Kuehl
Cell 920-419-8983
jason.w.ku...@gmail.com

Re: ICANN Response (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

[Jorge Amodio]

I believe it is a proper response, besides that it is not right for ICANN
to get in the middle of this type of conflict, in situations like this,
increasing the flow of real information counters the flow of misinformation.

-J

On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 7:05 AM John Curran  wrote:

> ICANN response request from the Ukraine regarding various DNS
> interventions –
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/marby-to-fedorov-02mar22-en.pdf
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
> On 2 Mar 2022, at 1:01 AM, John Curran  wrote:
>
> Regarding the portion of the request to the RIPE NCC to withdraw the
> relevant Russia registered IP address blocks, it appears that the RIPE NCC
> has reiterated their position on such disputes -
>
>
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/announcements/ripe-ncc-executive-board-resolution-on-provision-of-critical-services
>
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
> On 1 Mar 2022, at 3:25 AM, Ryan Hamel  wrote:
>
> It’s already spread to the news -
> https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ukraine-icann-russia-internet-runet-disconnection-1314278/
>
> Ryan
>
> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf Of *George
> Herbert
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:17 AM
> *To:* Nanog 
> *Subject:* Ukraine request yikes
>
> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21
>
> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS
>
> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off,
> revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
>
> Seems… instability creating…
>
>
> -george
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>

ICANN Response (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

[John Curran]

ICANN response request from the Ukraine regarding various DNS interventions – 
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/marby-to-fedorov-02mar22-en.pdf

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


On 2 Mar 2022, at 1:01 AM, John Curran 
mailto:jcur...@arin.net>> wrote:

Regarding the portion of the request to the RIPE NCC to withdraw the relevant 
Russia registered IP address blocks, it appears that the RIPE NCC has 
reiterated their position on such disputes -
https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/announcements/ripe-ncc-executive-board-resolution-on-provision-of-critical-services

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

On 1 Mar 2022, at 3:25 AM, Ryan Hamel 
mailto:administra...@rkhtech.org>> wrote:

It’s already spread to the news - 
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ukraine-icann-russia-internet-runet-disconnection-1314278/

Ryan

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech@nanog.org>>
 On Behalf Of George Herbert
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:17 AM
To: Nanog mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Ukraine request yikes

Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

Seems… instability creating…

-george
Sent from my iPhone

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[John Levine]

It appears that Carsten Bormann  said:
>On 2. Mar 2022, at 17:38,   wrote:
>> 
>> “democracy”
>
>PSA: Please read
>
>https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/peacefield/6206c37b9d9e380022bed32f/is-it-fascism-is-it-socialism/
>
>before using words like this again.

Nice article, definitely worth reading.  Thanks.

R's,
John

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Carsten Bormann]

On 2. Mar 2022, at 17:38,   wrote:
> 
> “democracy”

PSA: Please read

https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/peacefield/6206c37b9d9e380022bed32f/is-it-fascism-is-it-socialism/

before using words like this again.

I hope this PSA is useful enough for minimizing “discussion" to warrant this 
otherwise blatantly off-topic posting.

Grüße, Carsten

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Jay Hennigan]

On 3/2/22 16:15, Glen Turner wrote:


Pretty much every nation has existing telecommunications laws with
power for regulation to require telecommunications providers not to
provide service to particular nation-states. Law written in an era
where Russia military deployment and expansionary policy was front of
mind.


That would be about a week ago.

--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Glen Turner]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

There's no need for Ukraine to engage ICAAN to achieve its goals.

Pretty much every nation has existing telecommunications laws with
power for regulation to require telecommunications providers not to
provide service to particular nation-states. Law written in an era
where Russia military deployment and expansionary policy was front of
mind.

It's really up to each national leadership to decide if they wish to
support the intent of Ukraine's request by issuing regulation. Much as
nations are currently doing for the finance sector.

- -glen

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iF0EARECAB0WIQTe/Jmxd43ni8odCHCd+sN+Fh/aDwUCYiAIsgAKCRCd+sN+Fh/a
DyJLAJ4tV31b2CmgavcUURWDcfj6uQFxPwCggKQmgp4lxjDe16t45Q6bPxYKGdQ=
=FRhj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[John Levine]

It appears that Daniel Suchy via NANOG  said:
>It's also technically possible to perform full AXFR from some official 
>root-server (it's allowed on some instances) and bring your own 
>root-server locally-anycasted instance anywhere you want.

It's not just possible, it's quite common.  See RFC 8806.

I run local roots on my small networks.

R's,
John
-- 
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Bryan Fields]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256


On 3/2/22 11:57 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> There is a reason that the US Government was developing and promulgating
> things like TOR, for a while.

Turns out if you run 2/3 of the tor nodes, you can unmask people.  Governments
are not capable of being altruistic.
- -- 
Bryan Fields

727-409-1194 - Voice
http://bryanfields.net
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=BWnW
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

RE: Ukraine request yikes

[justin]

The problem with all of these sorts of things and why respectable entities like 
ICANN should avoid such things is because its inherently subjective and prone 
to a sort of viewers bias that is moulded more or less by the propaganda of the 
state from which you come (in our case, North America/US et al).

For instance, an actually unpopular opinion is that this all started when a 
lawfully elected government was overthrown by a minority of the population 
(<1%) and that the majority of Ukrainians were disenfranchised as a result. 
This was particularly acute in the Donbass region that voted for Yanukovych 
very heavily. This brought about an actual rebellion, one that is flatly denied 
by the government in Kyiv, which in turn brought about the Minsk agreement 
where the breakdown was that the rebels sought to have local elections for 
their own governors/mayors that could not be dismissed by the federal 
legislature. For whatever reason, the Government in Kyiv found this unpalatable 
and never implemented this part of the agreement until finally the ceasefire 
broke down and a formal war ensued. The point of this paragraph being that 
discerning which side is representing "democracy" is a matter of perspective.

Because the shoe could easily fit on the other foot and also be legitimately 
correct and the same argument could be made to remove TLDs for UA or supporting 
countries and because which is correct is almost always a matter of 
perspective-- its best for any such governing entity to avoid allowing itself 
to be drawn into such ordeals. 

As for their request, given that the country has more or less banned all 
periodicals in Russian from the news stand irrelevant of content, routinely 
shutdown independent media outlets and because this email simply acknowledging 
valid grievances in south eastern Ukraine could be cause for a 10 year term in 
prison if written from within Ukraine-- I will only say that I find the request 
by the government there to be "extremely consistent with Ukrainian values".


-Original Message-
From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Matt 
Hoppes
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 5:54 PM
To: George Herbert ; Nanog 
Subject: Re: Ukraine request yikes

My (unpopular opinion) Russia does not deserve any amenities of the modern 
world.  They have made their bed and now they have to sleep in it.

On 3/1/22 3:16 AM, George Herbert wrote:
> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21
> 
> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS
> 
> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, 
> revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
> 
> Seems… instability creating…
> 
> -george
> 
> Sent from my iPhone

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Grant Taylor via NANOG]

On 3/2/22 8:53 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
My (unpopular opinion) Russia does not deserve any amenities of the 
modern world.  They have made their bed and now they have to sleep in it.


I think it's very important to differentiate between Russia as the 
governmental entity and Russia as the body of governed citizens.


My understanding is that many of the latter disagree with what's 
happening and don't support, or actively fight against, the current events.


The former seldom accurately reflects the will of the latter.  Not all 
Germans were Nazis and not all Americans want the border wall.


So, how do we address the former without unduly punishing the latter for 
the former's actions?




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Miles Fidelman]

Anybody remember the days when:

- News of the USSR's fall was leaking out over USENET?

- Folks were live posting from gas-proofed rooms in Israel, during one 
of the wars?


There is a reason that the US Government was developing and promulgating 
things like TOR, for a while.  Kind of useless if we cut the lines of 
communication.  (Of course, removing DNS records doesn't effect 
connectivity.)


Miles Fidelman


Matt Hoppes wrote:
Information sharing should increase on the ATTACKED side... it should 
DECREASE and be cut off on the non-provoked attacker's side.


On 3/1/22 3:53 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:



On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:19 AM George Herbert 
mailto:george.herb...@gmail.com>> wrote:


    Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

    https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

    Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off,
    revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

    Seems… instability creating…

    -george



Information sharing should increase during wartime, not decrease.

Restricting information is more often the playbook of authoritarian 
regimes,

and not something we should generally support.

Besides, GhostWriter is based out of Belarus, not Russia proper.  ^_^;
https://www.wired.com/story/ghostwriter-hackers-belarus-russia-misinformationo/ 



Matt






--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Matt Hoppes]

That's a valid argument.

And no I don't think ISPs, ICANN, or any other organization should get 
involved in political disputes.


Where Russia has crossed the line, though, is in the way they are 
handling the situation.   You bomb/attack government 
buildings/communication infrastructure/roadways/etc.  Launch a party to 
assassinate the leaders.


You *don't* attack apartment buildings, shoot citizens that are just in 
the street, target populated areas, dress up as the other party, use 
vacuum bombs.


The problem here is not that there is a spat between Ukraine and Russia, 
the problem is that Russia has violated like 10 different things in the 
Geneva Convention on how you fight a war.


On 3/2/22 11:38 AM, justin@xor.systems wrote:

The problem with all of these sorts of things and why respectable entities like 
ICANN should avoid such things is because its inherently subjective and prone 
to a sort of viewers bias that is moulded more or less by the propaganda of the 
state from which you come (in our case, North America/US et al).

For instance, an actually unpopular opinion is that this all started when a lawfully elected 
government was overthrown by a minority of the population (<1%) and that the majority of 
Ukrainians were disenfranchised as a result. This was particularly acute in the Donbass 
region that voted for Yanukovych very heavily. This brought about an actual rebellion, one 
that is flatly denied by the government in Kyiv, which in turn brought about the Minsk 
agreement where the breakdown was that the rebels sought to have local elections for their 
own governors/mayors that could not be dismissed by the federal legislature. For whatever 
reason, the Government in Kyiv found this unpalatable and never implemented this part of the 
agreement until finally the ceasefire broke down and a formal war ensued. The point of this 
paragraph being that discerning which side is representing "democracy" is a matter 
of perspective.

Because the shoe could easily fit on the other foot and also be legitimately 
correct and the same argument could be made to remove TLDs for UA or supporting 
countries and because which is correct is almost always a matter of 
perspective-- its best for any such governing entity to avoid allowing itself 
to be drawn into such ordeals.

As for their request, given that the country has more or less banned all periodicals in 
Russian from the news stand irrelevant of content, routinely shutdown independent media 
outlets and because this email simply acknowledging valid grievances in south eastern 
Ukraine could be cause for a 10 year term in prison if written from within Ukraine-- I 
will only say that I find the request by the government there to be "extremely 
consistent with Ukrainian values".


-Original Message-
From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Matt 
Hoppes
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 5:54 PM
To: George Herbert ; Nanog 
Subject: Re: Ukraine request yikes

My (unpopular opinion) Russia does not deserve any amenities of the modern 
world.  They have made their bed and now they have to sleep in it.

On 3/1/22 3:16 AM, George Herbert wrote:

Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off,
revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

Seems… instability creating…

-george

Sent from my iPhone

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Bruce H McIntosh]

On 3/2/22 10:54, Matt Hoppes wrote:

[External Email]

Information sharing should increase on the ATTACKED side... it should
DECREASE and be cut off on the non-provoked attacker's side.


Trouble is, that leads to two deleterious effects in this case:
1) The rest of the world is left with just the Putin Gov't's word on what's 
going on *in* Russia
2) The Russian people are left with just the Putin Gov't's word on what's going 
on *elsewhere*



Information sharing should increase during wartime, not decrease.

Restricting information is more often the playbook of authoritarian
regimes, and not something we should generally support.


THIS.

--

Bruce H. McIntosh
Network Engineer II
University of Florida Information Technology
b...@ufl.edu
352-273-1066

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Matt Hoppes]

Information sharing should increase on the ATTACKED side... it should 
DECREASE and be cut off on the non-provoked attacker's side.


On 3/1/22 3:53 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:



On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:19 AM George Herbert > wrote:


Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off,
revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

Seems… instability creating…

-george



Information sharing should increase during wartime, not decrease.

Restricting information is more often the playbook of authoritarian 
regimes,

and not something we should generally support.

Besides, GhostWriter is based out of Belarus, not Russia proper.  ^_^;
https://www.wired.com/story/ghostwriter-hackers-belarus-russia-misinformationo/

Matt

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Matt Hoppes]

My (unpopular opinion) Russia does not deserve any amenities of the 
modern world.  They have made their bed and now they have to sleep in it.


On 3/1/22 3:16 AM, George Herbert wrote:
Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21


https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, 
revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.


Seems… instability creating…

-george

Sent from my iPhone

RIPE NCC position (Re: Ukraine request yikes)

[John Curran]

Regarding the portion of the request to the RIPE NCC to withdraw the relevant 
Russia registered IP address blocks, it appears that the RIPE NCC has 
reiterated their position on such disputes -
https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/announcements/ripe-ncc-executive-board-resolution-on-provision-of-critical-services

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

On 1 Mar 2022, at 3:25 AM, Ryan Hamel 
mailto:administra...@rkhtech.org>> wrote:

It’s already spread to the news - 
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ukraine-icann-russia-internet-runet-disconnection-1314278/

Ryan

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech@nanog.org>>
 On Behalf Of George Herbert
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:17 AM
To: Nanog mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Ukraine request yikes

Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

Seems… instability creating…

-george
Sent from my iPhone

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Jay Hennigan]

"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it"

- John Gilmore


--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Fred Baker]

China has worried that the root server operators would do such a thing to them, 
and I have argued that it is contrary to our published principles (RaSSAC055) 
and or practice. “We have never done so; what would that serve?”

I have the same question here.

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...

> On Mar 1, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Rubens Kuhl  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> More or less.  The Government Advisory Committee member from Ukraine has 
>> asked ICANN to:
>> - Revoke .RU, .рф, and .SU (all Russian-managed ccTLDs)
>> 
>> As the GAC member undoubtedly knows, that’s not how ICANN works. Barring a 
>> court/executive order in ICANN’s jurisdiction (and even then, it gets a bit 
>> sticky see 
>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/13/dc-court-rules-that-top-level-domain-not-subject-to-seizure/),
>>  ICANN essentially treats ccTLDs as national sovereign resources. A third 
>> party, no matter how justified, requesting a change of this nature will not 
>> go anywhere. Simply put, ICANN is NOT a regulator in the forma sense, it is 
>> a private entity incorporated in California. The powers that it has are the 
>> result of mutual contractual obligations and it’s a bit unlikely the Russian 
>> government has entered into any contracts with ICANN, particularly those 
>> that would allow ICANN to unilaterally revoke any of the Russian ccTLDs.
> 
> I wonder how ICANN would react to ISO removing RU/RUS from ISO 3166-2/3.
> 
> 
> Rubens

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[David Conrad]

Again, aside from turning off the ICANN-operated root servers (which would be 
pointless), the remainder of the requests from the UA Government Advisory 
Committee member are not something ICANN could/would do unilaterally regardless 
of the validity of the justification.

Regards,
-drc

> On Mar 1, 2022, at 4:00 PM, virendra rode  wrote:
> 
> I concur, this is an extremely dangerous slippery slope that ICANN should 
> refrain. There’s the possibility for misfires, misattribution and 
> miscalculation that could backfire which is extremely concerning.
> 
> —
> regards,
> /vrode
> 
>> On Mar 1, 2022, at 00:56, Matthew Petach  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:19 AM George Herbert > > wrote:
>> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
>> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21 
>> 
>> 
>> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS 
>> 
>> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
>> address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
>> 
>> Seems… instability creating…
>> 
>> -george
>> 
>> 
>> Information sharing should increase during wartime, not decrease.
>> 
>> Restricting information is more often the playbook of authoritarian regimes,
>> and not something we should generally support.
>> 
>> Besides, GhostWriter is based out of Belarus, not Russia proper.  ^_^;
>> https://www.wired.com/story/ghostwriter-hackers-belarus-russia-misinformationo/
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> Matt
>> 
>> 
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[virendra rode]

I concur, this is an extremely dangerous slippery slope that ICANN should 
refrain. There’s the possibility for misfires, misattribution and 
miscalculation that could backfire which is extremely concerning.

—
regards,
/vrode 

> On Mar 1, 2022, at 00:56, Matthew Petach  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:19 AM George Herbert  
>> wrote:
>> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
>> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21
>> 
>> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS
>> 
>> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
>> address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
>> 
>> Seems… instability creating…
>> 
>> -george
> 
> 
> Information sharing should increase during wartime, not decrease.
> 
> Restricting information is more often the playbook of authoritarian regimes, 
> and not something we should generally support.  
> 
> Besides, GhostWriter is based out of Belarus, not Russia proper.  ^_^;
> https://www.wired.com/story/ghostwriter-hackers-belarus-russia-misinformationo/
> 
> Matt
> 
> 
> 

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Rubens Kuhl]

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 5:17 AM George Herbert  wrote:
>
> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21
>
> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS
>
> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
> address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
>
> Seems… instability creating…


While not happening at scale at this time, we might have to consider
some measures to deter cyberwarfare if it escalates to that. And this
is not done by revoking IP addresses or TLDs, but by shutting down
actual network ports.

As long as the war keeps being kinetic and information/propaganda, the
network is probably a better part of the solution.


Rubens

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[JASON BOTHE via NANOG]

Not sure how I feel about this. My thoughts have always been to leave 
government out of Internet operations or otherwise they get comfortable and 
will want to make decisions that we may not be comfortable with. 

During wartime, I would think the desire would be to have them connected in 
order to have access to information and knowledge as necessary. If the idea is 
suppress Russia from performing bad actions, disconnecting their tld(s) will 
not solve this and is just a bad approach all around. 

J~

> On Mar 1, 2022, at 16:22, George Herbert  wrote:
> 
> I don’t hear anyone in the networks field supporting doing it.
> 
> It was a yikes that the request was made, but not looking at all likely to 
> happen IMHO.
> 
> -george  
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>>> On Mar 1, 2022, at 2:12 PM, Brian R  wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>> The problem with all this talk, especially with trusted international 
>> neutral organizations, is that once they bend they will never be trusted 
>> again.  Shutting off the routes, removing TLDs (or keeping them because of 
>> politics), etc will cause irreparable damage to these organizations.  Bowing 
>> to governments, politics, etc does not have a path back from future control.
>> This is a recommendation that will only hurt people (China, North Korea, 
>> [even the USA], etc all do this to control their people).  Governments will 
>> get around whatever the limitations are, it may take them time and resources 
>> but they will get around it.  Freedom of information is the only way to help 
>> people understand the reality of what is going on in the world (galaxy, 
>> universe, etc).
>> 
>> Brian
>> Technological solutions for Sociological problems 
>> 
>> From: NANOG  on behalf of 
>> Bryan Fields 
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:23 PM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org 
>> Subject: Re: Ukraine request yikes
>>  
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>> 
>> 
>> On 3/1/22 4:08 PM, David Conrad wrote:
>> > See .SU.
>> >
>> > (SU was moved from allocated to "transitionally reserved” back when the
>> > USSR broke up. My recollection is that an agreement was reached by which
>> > .SU users would be migrated out to appropriate new ccTLDs, that is, the
>> > ccTLDs based on ISO codes created for former Soviet republics, and no new
>> > entries would be added to .SU. However, when ICANN tried to propose a plan
>> > to finalize removing .SU from the root (around 2006 or so), the operators
>> > of .SU reopened registrations and complained to the US Dept. of Commerce,
>> > who were overseeing ICANN performance of the IANA Functions contract.
>> > Eventually, the Russian government was able to convince ISO-3166/MA to move
>> > SU to “exceptionally reserved” (like UK, EU, and a number of others) and
>> > forward motion on removing .SU from the root essentially ceased.)
>> 
>> I know someone (non-Russian) using .su for a funny name ending in .su.  This
>> is non-political and caters only to an English speaking audience.  These were
>> registered in the last few years, so they are still open and taking the
>> registrations.
>> 
>> I would ask what of .ly used for various URL shorteners, and .kp or .cn?  All
>> these are representing evil countries too, why do they get a pass.  I'm
>> certain they would argue .us should be revoked for the same.
>> 
>> This would break connectivity, and that's a bad thing.
>> - -- 
>> Bryan Fields
>> 
>> 727-409-1194 - Voice
>> http://bryanfields.net
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> 
>> iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEaESdNosUjpjcN/JhYTmgYVLGkUAFAmIejrUACgkQYTmgYVLG
>> kUA+QQ//Z9ovTSFqVEunql2guHAN3xWaNpCpuNJCGM68dJTBSWrPEY0zFXlmZG1k
>> 0TWrSrRSoWogiJmRvaOuFx6KxkaADqZaZq6OFaCw3jvyFGULw+auyuATGlhnUL8p
>> CV0AbovPUnoAef1qJdglFkqnfrGBxeBGsgRIM8tx2l/G+zq5MdMnCx9cM+JmmN1y
>> b+jrV4oekgXRZLAMI/sA9clMAXUmlgReRvit8YBccunkmMP8naQ92vj9dvVGZld0
>> hGguK2a7vFXpDiW5o0nFe5GRdGIqM0aWUz6p0qkB9JudkZkAyEqSpCePZky4LdAt
>> ebh9544PZu/vllQjv3L6vENlCURcifTIRSevcwfKZtos7UG4mJI1UQ51OLTRjB7a
>> nqYkVNJSQJ+dXZFLPoRHNUOu4+1MAyozpDeMJzMsr4a7Ru2lh0AOTiXxDaSRhOd+
>> 2s3rQigh/l6cP/x9iM7+f+rInHzPihHfjbwcxhyqd12EFxgTe3hvi9JlRSe18RYw
>> bnDKQg3xKp1eIk0sZMeLyIWDERjsMxIuEP9MuKHp+oTCrLq6MFSgUiFan7M5Pk2t
>> mwB3sbFuwkVzfmDbbnbelll30ukXQM3d7KVp2AHbsvI6hNs6zHZgRb7ZgGrR9Ep5
>> 6UlYqVqQOWtYNujNxYRgzemFI6lgJj8GHyDeh0wLRCP0aw/ATPg=
>> =KK8e
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[George Herbert]

I don’t hear anyone in the networks field supporting doing it.

It was a yikes that the request was made, but not looking at all likely to 
happen IMHO.

-george  

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 1, 2022, at 2:12 PM, Brian R  wrote:
> 
> 
> The problem with all this talk, especially with trusted international neutral 
> organizations, is that once they bend they will never be trusted again.  
> Shutting off the routes, removing TLDs (or keeping them because of politics), 
> etc will cause irreparable damage to these organizations.  Bowing to 
> governments, politics, etc does not have a path back from future control.
> This is a recommendation that will only hurt people (China, North Korea, 
> [even the USA], etc all do this to control their people).  Governments will 
> get around whatever the limitations are, it may take them time and resources 
> but they will get around it.  Freedom of information is the only way to help 
> people understand the reality of what is going on in the world (galaxy, 
> universe, etc).
> 
> Brian
> Technological solutions for Sociological problems 
> 
> From: NANOG  on behalf of 
> Bryan Fields 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:23 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org 
> Subject: Re: Ukraine request yikes
>  
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> 
> On 3/1/22 4:08 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> > See .SU.
> >
> > (SU was moved from allocated to "transitionally reserved” back when the
> > USSR broke up. My recollection is that an agreement was reached by which
> > .SU users would be migrated out to appropriate new ccTLDs, that is, the
> > ccTLDs based on ISO codes created for former Soviet republics, and no new
> > entries would be added to .SU. However, when ICANN tried to propose a plan
> > to finalize removing .SU from the root (around 2006 or so), the operators
> > of .SU reopened registrations and complained to the US Dept. of Commerce,
> > who were overseeing ICANN performance of the IANA Functions contract.
> > Eventually, the Russian government was able to convince ISO-3166/MA to move
> > SU to “exceptionally reserved” (like UK, EU, and a number of others) and
> > forward motion on removing .SU from the root essentially ceased.)
> 
> I know someone (non-Russian) using .su for a funny name ending in .su.  This
> is non-political and caters only to an English speaking audience.  These were
> registered in the last few years, so they are still open and taking the
> registrations.
> 
> I would ask what of .ly used for various URL shorteners, and .kp or .cn?  All
> these are representing evil countries too, why do they get a pass.  I'm
> certain they would argue .us should be revoked for the same.
> 
> This would break connectivity, and that's a bad thing.
> - -- 
> Bryan Fields
> 
> 727-409-1194 - Voice
> http://bryanfields.net
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEaESdNosUjpjcN/JhYTmgYVLGkUAFAmIejrUACgkQYTmgYVLG
> kUA+QQ//Z9ovTSFqVEunql2guHAN3xWaNpCpuNJCGM68dJTBSWrPEY0zFXlmZG1k
> 0TWrSrRSoWogiJmRvaOuFx6KxkaADqZaZq6OFaCw3jvyFGULw+auyuATGlhnUL8p
> CV0AbovPUnoAef1qJdglFkqnfrGBxeBGsgRIM8tx2l/G+zq5MdMnCx9cM+JmmN1y
> b+jrV4oekgXRZLAMI/sA9clMAXUmlgReRvit8YBccunkmMP8naQ92vj9dvVGZld0
> hGguK2a7vFXpDiW5o0nFe5GRdGIqM0aWUz6p0qkB9JudkZkAyEqSpCePZky4LdAt
> ebh9544PZu/vllQjv3L6vENlCURcifTIRSevcwfKZtos7UG4mJI1UQ51OLTRjB7a
> nqYkVNJSQJ+dXZFLPoRHNUOu4+1MAyozpDeMJzMsr4a7Ru2lh0AOTiXxDaSRhOd+
> 2s3rQigh/l6cP/x9iM7+f+rInHzPihHfjbwcxhyqd12EFxgTe3hvi9JlRSe18RYw
> bnDKQg3xKp1eIk0sZMeLyIWDERjsMxIuEP9MuKHp+oTCrLq6MFSgUiFan7M5Pk2t
> mwB3sbFuwkVzfmDbbnbelll30ukXQM3d7KVp2AHbsvI6hNs6zHZgRb7ZgGrR9Ep5
> 6UlYqVqQOWtYNujNxYRgzemFI6lgJj8GHyDeh0wLRCP0aw/ATPg=
> =KK8e
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Daniel Suchy via NANOG]

Hello,

On 3/1/22 21:08, David Conrad wrote:
- Shutdown the root server instances operated by ICANN that are within 
Russia
ICANN could conceivably do this unilaterally, but there are a lot more 
root server instances operated by other RSOs (including RIPE NCC, 
Verisign, ISC, and NASA).


It's also technically possible to perform full AXFR from some official 
root-server (it's allowed on some instances) and bring your own 
root-server locally-anycasted instance anywhere you want.


Shutdown of root servers in Russia will not  solve anything.

- Daniel

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Brian R]

The problem with all this talk, especially with trusted international neutral 
organizations, is that once they bend they will never be trusted again.  
Shutting off the routes, removing TLDs (or keeping them because of politics), 
etc will cause irreparable damage to these organizations.  Bowing to 
governments, politics, etc does not have a path back from future control.
This is a recommendation that will only hurt people (China, North Korea, [even 
the USA], etc all do this to control their people).  Governments will get 
around whatever the limitations are, it may take them time and resources but 
they will get around it.  Freedom of information is the only way to help people 
understand the reality of what is going on in the world (galaxy, universe, etc).

Brian
Technological solutions for Sociological problems


From: NANOG  on behalf of 
Bryan Fields 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:23 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Ukraine request yikes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256


On 3/1/22 4:08 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> See .SU.
>
> (SU was moved from allocated to "transitionally reserved” back when the
> USSR broke up. My recollection is that an agreement was reached by which
> .SU users would be migrated out to appropriate new ccTLDs, that is, the
> ccTLDs based on ISO codes created for former Soviet republics, and no new
> entries would be added to .SU. However, when ICANN tried to propose a plan
> to finalize removing .SU from the root (around 2006 or so), the operators
> of .SU reopened registrations and complained to the US Dept. of Commerce,
> who were overseeing ICANN performance of the IANA Functions contract.
> Eventually, the Russian government was able to convince ISO-3166/MA to move
> SU to “exceptionally reserved” (like UK, EU, and a number of others) and
> forward motion on removing .SU from the root essentially ceased.)

I know someone (non-Russian) using .su for a funny name ending in .su.  This
is non-political and caters only to an English speaking audience.  These were
registered in the last few years, so they are still open and taking the
registrations.

I would ask what of .ly used for various URL shorteners, and .kp or .cn?  All
these are representing evil countries too, why do they get a pass.  I'm
certain they would argue .us should be revoked for the same.

This would break connectivity, and that's a bad thing.
- --
Bryan Fields

727-409-1194 - Voice
http://bryanfields.net
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=KK8e
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Bryan Fields]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256


On 3/1/22 4:08 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> See .SU.
>
> (SU was moved from allocated to "transitionally reserved” back when the
> USSR broke up. My recollection is that an agreement was reached by which
> .SU users would be migrated out to appropriate new ccTLDs, that is, the
> ccTLDs based on ISO codes created for former Soviet republics, and no new
> entries would be added to .SU. However, when ICANN tried to propose a plan
> to finalize removing .SU from the root (around 2006 or so), the operators
> of .SU reopened registrations and complained to the US Dept. of Commerce,
> who were overseeing ICANN performance of the IANA Functions contract.
> Eventually, the Russian government was able to convince ISO-3166/MA to move
> SU to “exceptionally reserved” (like UK, EU, and a number of others) and
> forward motion on removing .SU from the root essentially ceased.)

I know someone (non-Russian) using .su for a funny name ending in .su.  This
is non-political and caters only to an English speaking audience.  These were
registered in the last few years, so they are still open and taking the
registrations.

I would ask what of .ly used for various URL shorteners, and .kp or .cn?  All
these are representing evil countries too, why do they get a pass.  I'm
certain they would argue .us should be revoked for the same.

This would break connectivity, and that's a bad thing.
- -- 
Bryan Fields

727-409-1194 - Voice
http://bryanfields.net
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=KK8e
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[David Conrad]

On Mar 1, 2022, at 12:27 PM, Rubens Kuhl  wrote:
>> More or less.  The Government Advisory Committee member from Ukraine has 
>> asked ICANN to:
>> - Revoke .RU, .рф, and .SU (all Russian-managed ccTLDs)
>> 
>> As the GAC member undoubtedly knows, that’s not how ICANN works. Barring a 
>> court/executive order in ICANN’s jurisdiction (and even then, it gets a bit 
>> sticky see 
>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/13/dc-court-rules-that-top-level-domain-not-subject-to-seizure/),
>>  ICANN essentially treats ccTLDs as national sovereign resources. A third 
>> party, no matter how justified, requesting a change of this nature will not 
>> go anywhere. Simply put, ICANN is NOT a regulator in the forma sense, it is 
>> a private entity incorporated in California. The powers that it has are the 
>> result of mutual contractual obligations and it’s a bit unlikely the Russian 
>> government has entered into any contracts with ICANN, particularly those 
>> that would allow ICANN to unilaterally revoke any of the Russian ccTLDs.
> 
> I wonder how ICANN would react to ISO removing RU/RUS from ISO 3166-2/3.

See .SU.

(SU was moved from allocated to "transitionally reserved” back when the USSR 
broke up. My recollection is that an agreement was reached by which .SU users 
would be migrated out to appropriate new ccTLDs, that is, the ccTLDs based on 
ISO codes created for former Soviet republics, and no new entries would be 
added to .SU. However, when ICANN tried to propose a plan to finalize removing 
.SU from the root (around 2006 or so), the operators of .SU reopened 
registrations and complained to the US Dept. of Commerce, who were overseeing 
ICANN performance of the IANA Functions contract. Eventually, the Russian 
government was able to convince ISO-3166/MA to move SU to “exceptionally 
reserved” (like UK, EU, and a number of others) and forward motion on removing 
.SU from the root essentially ceased.)

Regards,
-drc



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Rubens Kuhl]

> More or less.  The Government Advisory Committee member from Ukraine has 
> asked ICANN to:
> - Revoke .RU, .рф, and .SU (all Russian-managed ccTLDs)
>
> As the GAC member undoubtedly knows, that’s not how ICANN works. Barring a 
> court/executive order in ICANN’s jurisdiction (and even then, it gets a bit 
> sticky see 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/13/dc-court-rules-that-top-level-domain-not-subject-to-seizure/),
>  ICANN essentially treats ccTLDs as national sovereign resources. A third 
> party, no matter how justified, requesting a change of this nature will not 
> go anywhere. Simply put, ICANN is NOT a regulator in the forma sense, it is a 
> private entity incorporated in California. The powers that it has are the 
> result of mutual contractual obligations and it’s a bit unlikely the Russian 
> government has entered into any contracts with ICANN, particularly those that 
> would allow ICANN to unilaterally revoke any of the Russian ccTLDs.

I wonder how ICANN would react to ISO removing RU/RUS from ISO 3166-2/3.


Rubens

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[David Conrad]

On Mar 1, 2022, at 12:16 AM, George Herbert  wrote:
> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
> address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

More or less.  The Government Advisory Committee member from Ukraine has asked 
ICANN to:
- Revoke .RU, .рф, and .SU (all Russian-managed ccTLDs)

As the GAC member undoubtedly knows, that’s not how ICANN works. Barring a 
court/executive order in ICANN’s jurisdiction (and even then, it gets a bit 
sticky see 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/13/dc-court-rules-that-top-level-domain-not-subject-to-seizure/
 
),
 ICANN essentially treats ccTLDs as national sovereign resources. A third 
party, no matter how justified, requesting a change of this nature will not go 
anywhere. Simply put, ICANN is NOT a regulator in the forma sense, it is a 
private entity incorporated in California. The powers that it has are the 
result of mutual contractual obligations and it’s a bit unlikely the Russian 
government has entered into any contracts with ICANN, particularly those that 
would allow ICANN to unilaterally revoke any of the Russian ccTLDs.

- "Contribute to the revoking for SSL certificates for the abovementioned 
domains.”

I’m not sure what this even means.

- Shutdown the root server instances operated by ICANN that are within Russia

ICANN could conceivably do this unilaterally, but there are a lot more root 
server instances operated by other RSOs (including RIPE NCC, Verisign, ISC, and 
NASA). Even if all the RSOs shut down their instances, it’d merely increase 
latency for root queries by a small amount unless all DNS traffic to the RSO 
IPs were blocked at Russian borders.  And even then, Russia has been “testing” 
operating in a disconnected mode, so it’s highly likely there are root server 
equivalents in Russia that would continue to resolve root queries.

However, as mentioned, the UA GAC member probably knows all this and I imagine 
the intent of this letter was less to cause the requested actions to actually 
occur than it was to raise the profile of the conflict in the Internet 
governance context.

Regards,
-drc



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: Ukraine request yikes

[Matthew Petach]

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:19 AM George Herbert 
wrote:

> Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter…
> https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21
>
> https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS
>
> Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off,
> revoke address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.
>
> Seems… instability creating…
>
> -george
>


Information sharing should increase during wartime, not decrease.

Restricting information is more often the playbook of authoritarian
regimes,
and not something we should generally support.

Besides, GhostWriter is based out of Belarus, not Russia proper.  ^_^;
https://www.wired.com/story/ghostwriter-hackers-belarus-russia-misinformationo/

Matt

RE: Ukraine request yikes

[Ryan Hamel]

It’s already spread to the news - 
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ukraine-icann-russia-internet-runet-disconnection-1314278/

 

Ryan

 

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of George 
Herbert
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:17 AM
To: Nanog 
Subject: Ukraine request yikes

 

Posted by Bill Woodcock on Twitter… 
https://twitter.com/woodyatpch/status/1498472865301098500?s=21

 

https://pastebin.com/DLbmYahS

 

Ukraine (I think I read as) want ICANN to turn root nameservers off, revoke 
address delegations, and turn off TLDs for Russia.

 

Seems… instability creating…

 

-george

Sent from my iPhone