UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July

Tue Feb 22 18:53:47 UTC 2005

What if the UN says ITU should run the TLDs, ICANN says yes, and, a
significant portion of the operational internet says no?

Owen

--On Tuesday, February 22, 2005 5:53 AM -0800 Ross 
<rosshosman at spamarrest.com> wrote:

>
>
> No government will ever have the internet's best interest in mind when
> they talk about controlling it. Luckily government control has been kept
> some what to a minimum so far but it's  growing rapidly and this is
> another attempt for a government body to "control" the internet.
>
> I wonder what new rules will be put in place if the ITU gets control?
>
> I also wonder if the ITU can really take control. What if the U.N. says
> the ITU should run the TLD's and ICANN says no?
>
>
>
> On Mon Feb 21 18:15:00 PST 2005, Joel Jaeggli <joelja
> @darkwing.uoregon.edu=""> wrote:</joelja>
>
> > When I hear Robert Mugabe talk about internet governance I don't
> really
> > get the impression that he has the interests of the people of
> Zimbabwe at
> > heart.
> >
> > joelja
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Dave Crocker wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:45:12 -0500, Scott W Brim wrote:
> >>>  >  I'm intrigued at the failure to distinguish between
> the web and
> >>>  >
> >>>  >  email, given that spam is a messaging phenomenon, not
> a publishing
> >>>  >  phenomenon.
> >>>  >
> >>>   It's actually a failure to distinguish the web from the
> Internet
> >>
> >> i was probably too cryptic.  yes, they are using the term 'web'
> to mean 'the internet'.
> >>
> >> the problem is that professional writing needs to be careful,
> and a failure at such a basic level as using web to apply to email does
> not bode well for the utility of the article...
> >>
> >>
> >> d/
> >> --
> >> Dave Crocker
> >> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> >> +1.408.246.8253
> >> dcrocker  a t ...
> >> WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net
> >>
> >
> > --
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting
> joelja at darkwing.uoregon.edu
> > GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB
> B67F 56B2
> >
>

-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20050222/e823541a/attachment.sig>