Comment by ggm
3 days ago
So a highly specific problem couched in terms of the legal obligations of the registry. But,you ignore the other dimension of WHY a legal authority might require a registry to act.
Do you honestly think the world would be better if there was no international law, or legal constraints on ISPs? Do you think BGP operators are somehow supra legal?
The registry system we live in has operated for almost 3 decades now, an inheritance of a prior informal arrangement. It's a mutuality. If you want to change it, get involved in it's policy process.
The internet is supposed to be a decentralized network.
When ISPs have so much control, I don't see it as decentralized.
It is designed for fallbacks or ability to reroute when connections become congested or get cut.
Real world decentralized communication would not require an ISP and could operate by proxy with multi modes of communication. This way you can circumvent Government restrictions.
Sneaker net is decentralized and how North Koreans circumvent their government.
An RFC for data transport over balloon attached USB flash would not appear on 1 April, with or without quality of service.
At the tier-1 level it is already decentralized in the way you describe.
1 reply →
It is already like you say it should be.
I don’t think that one country should get to unilaterally decide whether another country gets internet, no.
Why would a country take these actions?
Why would a country cut off the International Criminal Court? Not a big step to cut off a country.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/feb/18/international-cr...
For any reason or no reason? I mean, that’s kind of the point I’m making. Countries disagree and have conflicts all the time. No country should be enabled to unilaterally cut off another’s internet in such cases
You do understand that the hypothetical threat actor here is one who openly disregards international law?
https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-be...
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-imposes-sanctions-internati...
>Do you honestly think the world would be better if there was no international law, or legal constraints on ISPs? Do you think BGP operators are somehow supra legal?
Yes. It was the vision of the internet to continue on outside of the whatever political whims some tiny slice of western governments.
It’s just too ripe for abuse.
You can make whatever “whatabout” arguments on DNS, etc but none of those are required to get connectivity (DHT, p2p hosts, tor names, etc).
Any centralization around the narrow middle IP layer of the internet should be treated with extreme skepticism and pushback.
This is what happens when someone wants to regulate the crap outta everything. what a dumb ass take.
Regulate the crap out of invading a peaceful neighboring country ? I’m down for it.
You want the USA to be sanctioned and banned from the internet?
1 reply →
track @jeremyjh