nanog mailing list archives
Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered?
From: Beavis <pfunix () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 23:01:19 -0600
we'll if ICANN't .. maybe HECANN (*trying out humor*). this idea of second internet doesn't make sense. icann alone is already a handful. On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:50 PM, Ken <ken () sizone org> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:20:17PM -0600, Beavis said: >I come across this interesting link. > >http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4828&tag=nl.e036 > >Is ICANN really that susceptible to govt. pressure? Funny, tho - being succeptible to govt pressure CREATES an alt root DNS structure. You'd think the smart thinkers in the govt woulda figured that out. Apply pressure and it splinters. Sometimes easier to supervise if its in one pile, no? Also, "new DNS = whole new internet"? lol. /kc -- Ken Chase - ken () heavycomputing ca - +1 416 897 6284 - Toronto CANADA Heavy Computing - Clued bandwidth, colocation and managed linux VPS @151 Front St. W.
-- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments Disclaimer: http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
Current thread:
- Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? Beavis (Dec 14)
- Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? Ken (Dec 14)
- Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? Beavis (Dec 14)
- Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? David Conrad (Dec 14)
- Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? Jimmy Hess (Dec 14)
- Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? Joly MacFie (Dec 14)
- Re: Net-Neutrality or Net-Neutered? Ken (Dec 14)