TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Showdown with USA Over Internet Control

Re: Showdown with USA Over Internet Control

Scott Dorsey (kludge@panix.com)
30 Nov 2005 14:08:16 -0500

<nospam4me@mytrashmail.com> wrote:

> So what would you have ICANN do about spam and other forms of
> anti-social net behavior?

The same thing that SRI did, before ICANN existed. Disconnect sites
that refuse to control their problem customers.

Very simple. The reason that spam exists is because some ISPs permit it.
The reason that some ISPs permit it is because backbone sites permit it.

Shutting off connectivity to kornet and thrunet would about halve
the spam problem, right there.

If backbone sites took spam seriously, it would go away. If ICANN took
spam seriously, backbone sites would have to.

<jmeissen@aracnet.com> wrote:

> I'm afraid you're overstating things a bit.

> ICANN's arbitration authority is over the domain name. Period. It
> has nothing to do with the content hosted at any site. They have
> no control over any website (other than their own), simply the
> name by which it's referenced.

Yes. They can say "your service is not appropriate and therefore we
refuse to allow bulkemail.com (a former uunet customer) to receive
DNS." Furthermore, they can shut off the uunet dns until uunet gets
their spam problem under control.

JUST like Postel did with problem customers back in the days when he
ran the name server.

scott

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: __Thank you very much__ for speaking
the truth on this, something which seems to be in very short
supply where the liars at ICANN and their mouthpiece Vint Cerf are
concerned. I have said time and time again that spam could be cut
back considerably if ICANN would just make it happen. But ICANN and
Vint Cerf are not about to make that happen; their preference, (and
the loud mouths of their choir of apologists) _like_ seeing the
internet gradually being converted to a totally commercial thing. When
did Postel pass? Was it 1993 or 1994? They couldn't wait to get the
net out of his hands and into theirs.

I know that about that time, their flunkies, the International Telecom
Union (ITU) decided to start humoring (and attempting to bribe?)
people like myself with gobs of money to sing to their tune. ITU
promptly started sending me $500 per month and they did so
'faithfully' every quarter -- 3 months, $1500 -- clear up through the
end of 1999 when they saw I would not be quiet and do things their
way. Then a message or two they considered to be particularly
outragous appeared here and bingo! that was it for my 'sponsorship'.

That monthly hush money started about the time that I was on that long
distance telephone conference call with Vint Cerf and asked him what
the hell was going to happen to us little users who only wanted to use
the net for its originally intended purpose? Cerf had no answers but
then shortly thereafter the money started showing up here.

Nah ... don't count on anything but spam, scam and more deterioration
of the net as long as ICANN is our governor. It just won't happen. PAT]

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Michael Kahn: "Microsoft Lets Consumers Try New Security Service"
Go to Previous message: Scott Dorsey: "Re: Voicepulse Owns Your Number"
May be in reply to: Andy Sullivan: "Showdown with USA Over Internet Control"
Next in thread: Mark Crispin: "Re: Showdown with USA Over Internet Control"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page