[127001] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Nato warns of strike against cyber attackers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (JC Dill)
Wed Jun 9 14:36:07 2010
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:35:46 -0700
From: JC Dill <jcdill.lists@gmail.com>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C0FA18A.10108@cox.net>
Reply-To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
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.
jc
