[anymouse]

Another reason for the US to toss the UN out on their crooked tails.

Only the United Nations would want to put a ChiComm in charge of regulating the Internet.

[sure_fine]

Kofi is afraid the bloggers are going to expose even more about him

[markman46]

mark for late reading

[taxcontrol]

[sigh] I contend that the existing structure of the Internet is perfectly suited for any country or collection of countries to form their own Internet. What is basically at contention here is control of the top level domain servers and associated domain addresses - aka DNS.

Any country can simply require it's ISP's to use a specific country managed DNS server and then block DNS protocol over WAN links that leave that country except for the authorized TLD. If you wanted to get even more strict, you could use the existing TLD server's own resolution to create dynamic access-lists that would block all traffic to those sites.

The TLD server FOR THAT PARTICULAR COUNTRY would obtain updates from other countries or ICANN TLD servers and could then edit the files as per their countries policy. Don't want someone going to xxx.us.gov? Edit it out of your countries TLD server and add it to the dynamic access-list.

You want to be a dictator over you own people - fine. Leave the rest of us out of your "Utopian" world.

[etcetera]

The U.N. in charge of the Internet? Nah! Name one thing that the U.N. runs that runs well. Except corruption, that is...

[Izzy Dunne]

The media thinks that country is not very transparent and open, and therefore that country is not transparent and open. I don't think so.

Huh?

When a country promises to host a U.N.-type conference, they have to respect the U.N. rules. The U.N. rules are quite clear: If any journalist comes to join this meeting, and a Tunisian authority tries to impose any sanction--I don't think that would happen.

I realize that English is probably not his native language, but this is a whole lot of words which say nothing.

[The Great RJ]

Wouldn't they have to get Al Gore's permission since he's the inventor of the Internet???

[kezekiel]

Let me boil it down for you: a whole lot of pointless, inpenetrable UN-speak, and then this:

One of the most important changes was the early stages, when the Internet started, when ICANN started in 1998. The purpose was to exclude governments (but that didn't work). People realize today that the governments worldwide have to play a role. People say the Internet flourished because of the absence of government control. I do not agree with this view. I argue that in any country, if the government opposed Internet service, how do you get Internet service? If there are any Internet governance structure changes in the future, I think government rules will be more important and more respected. (emphasis added)

Well, there it is. The whole point of involving the UN is to inject government control into the internet--and this from a representative from one of the few large countries that actually thinks they can control the internet.

Nothing good will come of the UN mucking around with the internet. Or just about anything else, for that matter.