[Unknown Target]

Except compatability issues. But he's right, why can't everyone else just build DNS servers of their own?

[YodaSean]

Originally posted by Bobboau
you could always just route around us, we own the hardware it seems only logical that we should administer it. there is nothing stopping you from building your own internet.

Yeah, but it would be such a pain in the ass to have two(or more) internets.  *4 years into the future, goes to cnn.com and hits a farm porn site).  "oops, wrong internet..."

[mikhael]

The problem isn't the DNS servers. The problem is INTERNIC. We own the core registry. Oh, yeah, every little country here and there has its own country TLD (.us, .au, .fr, .de, et al) but the vast majority of interesting content is under .com, .net and .org.

The solution isn't to build your own DNS servers. The solution is to build a new core registry and then route-hijack all requests intended for the root nameservers to the new  registry's root nameservers. All it would take is everyone else of any import everywhere but the US to get off their asses, bite the bullet and not let the US get away with it.

But it won't happen, because everyone knows, deep down in their hearts, that the Internet belongs to the United States. If they didn't, this situation would have been fixed already, seeing as how all of you outnumber all of us by about 20:1.

[castor]

Given the Internet's importance to the world’s economy, it is essential that the underlying DNS of the Internet remain stable and secure

Given the Internet's importance to the world’s economy, it is essential that the underlying DNS of the Internet remain in control of US government.

Why the hell would anyone disagree

[Zarax]

Originally posted by castor

Given the Internet's importance to the world’s economy, it is essential that the underlying DNS of the Internet remain in control of US government.

Why the hell would anyone disagree

Given the Internet's importance to the world’s economy, it is essential that the underlying DNS of the Internet remain in control of an International Body.

Why the hell anyone would deny Democracy

[Hunter]

The US will lose - Though it take a thousand years, we will be FREE.

[TrashMan]

Freedom is na illusion...

I don't really igva a damn..

[Admiral LSD]

*Bush takes a leak*

Public: OH NOES!!1!1 OUR FREEDOM@!1!

*yawn*

wake me up when I have to care.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Originally posted by mikhael


But it won't happen, because everyone knows, deep down in their hearts, that the Internet belongs to the United States.  

haha, but bollocks.
the reason is just that changing the whole thing would simply cost too much in many (un)expected ways.
A matter of practicality, not (your) nationalism.

[mikhael]

Methinks someone is missing his Sarcasm Meter.

[Janos]

Originally posted by Zarax


Given the Internet's importance to the world’s economy, it is essential that the underlying DNS of the Internet remain in control of an International Body.

Why the hell anyone would deny Democracy

The Internets are not democratic.

[Janos]

Originally posted by Deepblue

Fixed.

Because not all governments are US governments?

[Unknown Target]

Here, put this on. *hands Janos a sense of humor*
He meant that all govnerments are dumb, not all governments that aren't US governments are dumb.

[Zarax]

Originally posted by Janos


The Internets are not democratic.

You're right, they're anarchic.

[Janos]

Originally posted by Unknown Target
Here, put this on. *hands Janos a sense of humor*
He meant that all govnerments are dumb, not all governments that aren't US governments are dumb.

I pretty much disagree with "all governments are dumb", though.

[MatthewPapa]

The USA owns the hardware, they funded its early and current R&D so my opinion is that they should keep it at least for now. And plus, why fix somethign if it isnt broken? The USA hasnt done anything (to my knowledge anyway) showing that they cant handle the responsibility of managing the root servers.

[mikhael]

In that, MatthewPapa, you are mistaken. The handover of INTERNIC's responsibilities to Verisign was botched. The splitout to multiple competitive registrars was botched. Verisign continues to mismanage their duties horribly. ICANN has mishandled their role continually. All of this is happening as a direct result of the US federal government tinkering with a system that was working fine (albeit noncompetitively).

[Unknown Target]

I think what MathewPappa was saying was that the US hasn't exactly done anything to harm the internet itself. We're still surfing fine, it's not like anti-US websites have been cleansed off the net. We're a stable country and pretty good at maintaining the internet. While I think it'd be better if it was in international control, I'm not going to start sabre-rattling until the US does something that definately proves that it should not have the responsibility it does.

I pretty much disagree with "all governments are dumb", though.

That's nice. That's your opinion, that's his. He expressed his in a joke. Yay for both of you

[mikhael]

That's just it: the US SHOULD have the responsibility it has. We did create it, we've administered it for this long. This is, however, the Internet and the Internet is as open source as it gets. If other people think they can do better, the solution is simple: fork the project. Set up another shop. The rest is down to the market.

[Rictor]

As long as they keep the porn flowing, they can avoid full on mutiny. But mess with the sacred cow, and there's going to be trouble.