StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Uraniun235 wrote:I haven't kept up to date with news about ICANN; what decisions have they made that were unacceptable?

Well, you can start off from the links here and read the rest of the trhead if you feel like it, and there was another thread about related subjects here. The links from the first thread especially should give you a good idea about just how much ICANN sucks as an organization.

Edi

AMX wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:Incorrect. Many of the root nameservers are already located in geographical locations outside the US. ICANN's control is logical, not physical. They couldn't possibly deny root nameserver access to Europe.

So, when you IP-ban somebody, you need actual physical access to the server running the forum software?
Same thing, just on a different scale.

You've obviously never been a server admin. There's no way the people who have physical ownership of the server do not have root access. If I had a server in Pennsylvania and the server admin wanted to override my IP ban, he could do so easily.

Darth Wong wrote:Americans generally don't understand why Europeans would have a problem with ICANN because the system is set up to give the American government power over ICANN but Americans trust their own government not to abuse that power. The Europeans don't. It's as simple as that.

Has their been any examples of actual abuse? Is there any legitimate complaint about how ICAAN runs things other than the fact that the "evil Americans" are the ones holding the keys?

KHL wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:Americans generally don't understand why Europeans would have a problem with ICANN because the system is set up to give the American government power over ICANN but Americans trust their own government not to abuse that power. The Europeans don't. It's as simple as that.

Has their been any examples of actual abuse? Is there any legitimate complaint about how ICAAN runs things other than the fact that the "evil Americans" are the ones holding the keys?

The problem is entirely that ICANN is not the true holder; it's the US State Department, who are quite capable of dissolving ICANN's contract. Once again, if you were paying attention, it's the fact the US State Department keeps being belligerent.

KHL wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:Americans generally don't understand why Europeans would have a problem with ICANN because the system is set up to give the American government power over ICANN but Americans trust their own government not to abuse that power. The Europeans don't. It's as simple as that.

Has their been any examples of actual abuse? Is there any legitimate complaint about how ICAAN runs things other than the fact that the "evil Americans" are the ones holding the keys?

You can fucking start by reading the links posted. ICANN itself has been abusive, intractable and general asshats. They are currently as much or more of a problem than the US government, which does not pass muster on this issue eitehr for its failure to fix ICANN and its general hostility to any proposed changes.

So can you give us any reason why there should not be change, because the system as it currently is has been shown to not work as it should?

Edi

Darth Wong wrote:You've obviously never been a server admin. There's no way the people who have physical ownership of the server do not have root access. If I had a server in Pennsylvania and the server admin wanted to override my IP ban, he could do so easily.

Nice.
So if the guys operating the servers cooperate (Who's paying them, anyway? Could it be ICANN?), they can unban us relatively quickly.
Which does not mean it won't hurt.
Plus, why stop at merely banning us? Why not delete the content on such "untrustworthy" servers (or "update" it with garbage, for that matter)?
Restoring it from backup would take some time - and time is quite litterally money in this scenario.

AMX wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:You've obviously never been a server admin. There's no way the people who have physical ownership of the server do not have root access. If I had a server in Pennsylvania and the server admin wanted to override my IP ban, he could do so easily.

Nice.
So if the guys operating the servers cooperate (Who's paying them, anyway? Could it be ICANN?), they can unban us relatively quickly.
Which does not mean it won't hurt.
Plus, why stop at merely banning us? Why not delete the content on such "untrustworthy" servers (or "update" it with garbage, for that matter)?
Restoring it from backup would take some time - and time is quite litterally money in this scenario.

DNS servers share data through a particular protocol that does not require any DNS server admin to be able to remotely take control of another DNS server admin. The most one admin could do to another is to block him from getting any updates. And what is that going to accomplish, apart from messing up the system and hurting everyone on both sides? Do you think IBM would be happy about people outside the USA not being able to see their website?

Darth Wong wrote:DNS servers share data through a particular protocol that does not require any DNS server admin to be able to remotely take control of another DNS server admin. The most one admin could do to another is to block him from getting any updates.

Or redirect him to a server that's giving him junk disguised as an update.

And what is that going to accomplish, apart from messing up the system and hurting everyone on both sides? Do you think IBM would be happy about people outside the USA not being able to see their website?

And?
As long as it hurts us more than them, it's a (more or less) viable political tool.