Nato warns of strike against cyber attackers
jcdill.lists at gmail.com
Wed Jun 9 13:35:46 CDT 2010
Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 6/9/2010 01:11, JC Dill wrote:
>> Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> Heck, at this point, I'd be OK with it being a regulatory issue.
>> What entity do you see as having any possibility of effective regulatory
>> control over the internet?
> Doesn't matter as long as it enables radial outbound finger pointing.
It does matter because THERE IS NO SUCH ENTITY.
>> The reason we have these problems to begin with is because there is no
>> way for people (or government regulators) in the US to control ISPs in
>> eastern Europe etc.
> Or in the US.
> But what we see here is what is what is wrong with "regulation"--the
> regulated specify the regulation, primarily to protect the economic
> interests of the entrenched.
IMHO it is impossible to regulate the internet as a whole. It is built
out of too many different unregulated fragments (IP registries, domain
registries, ASs, Tier 1 networks, smaller networks, etc.) and there will
never be enough willingness for the unregulated entities to voluntarily
become regulated - if some of them agree to become regulated then others
will tout their unregulated (and cheaper) services. IMHO it would
require a massive effort of great firewalls (such as China has in place)
to *begin* to force regulation on the internet as a whole.
More information about the NANOG