The role of Internet governance in sanctions

Bill Woodcock woody at
Thu Mar 10 12:39:24 UTC 2022

> On Mar 10, 2022, at 1:24 PM, Randy Bush <randy at> wrote:
> while i abhor the russian invasion of the ukraine, and have put my money
> where my mouth is

(As an aside to others, our friends at the .UA ccTLD have recommended this as a useful place to donate:  It’s providing medical support to combatants.)

> i worry about the precedent of setting ourselves up as legislature, police, judge, and jury

We do this with spam, malware and phishing every day.  The people who were trying to benefit from the campaigns are very unhappy about it, but everyone else seems pleased with the outcome or, if anything, wants it to be even more effective.

> ...and the long term effects of centralizing such authority.

This is the Internet… when we do it right, nothing that matters is centralized.  There are dozens of spam, ddos, cp and malware BGP and RPZ feeds right now. Some are better-administered than others, but I wouldn’t call any of them an “authority,” nor do I worry about them becoming centralized.  This is no different.

> who will we censor and ostracize next?  a walt kelly cartoon comes to mind.

I view it more like their rowboat… A different name every time, but not often, never more than one, and never remarkable enough to warrant notice by the actors.

> otoh, i would likely close such meager services as i provide to russian use.

Indeed.  And I suspect the judgment of many network operators will be similar.  With a principled constraint that only military and propaganda networks will be included in the feed, I’m not too worried about this turning into fascism.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list