[172553] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: short, two part question ICANN Vs. The World
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael O Holstein)
Mon Jun 23 16:07:13 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Michael O Holstein <michael.holstein@csuohio.edu>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>, stovetop 202 <stovetop_202@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:05:07 +0000
In-Reply-To: <1403480728.65597.YahooMailNeo@web161401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Short answer,=0A=
=0A=
Yes .. provided you don't care if anyone can see it.=0A=
=0A=
Take a look at what NEW.NET tried with DNS back in the day.=0A=
=0A=
Cheers,=0A=
=0A=
Michael Holstein=0A=
Cleveland State University=0A=
________________________________________=0A=
From: NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org> on behalf of stovetop 202 <stovetop_2=
02@yahoo.com>=0A=
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2014 7:45 PM=0A=
To: nanog@nanog.org=0A=
Subject: short, two part question ICANN Vs. The World=0A=
=0A=
Topic: ICANN Vs. The World.=0A=
=0A=
The question at hand is.. Do countries/businesses have to affiliate or util=
ize any of those services provided by ICANN other than the assignment of an=
IP address? And can you get away with LAN/CAN/MAN stand-alone systems [in=
stead of utilizing DNS-via-ICANN]??=0A=
Example:=0A=
Is it legal to cut off those DNS systems and loop in backwards? (instead o=
f bidirectional). ** I don't want my city/schools/other systems hooked in=
to the World Wide Web. // someone let me know when you get a chance.=0A=
=0A=
