Last edited Mon Mar 17, 2014, 08:53 AM - Edit history (2)

It would be difficult to censor the internet through the root DNS zone. For instance, if someone wanted to censor democraticunderground.com through the root zone, they would need to censor all of the .com TLD (top-level domain).

DNS (domain name system) is a hierarchy with the root zone at the top. The next level are the TLDs (top-level domains), such as .com, .edu, .gov, .uk, etc. Each level has an authority which is responsible for the next sub-level or levels.

It would look something like this:

(root)
|
-> com
|
-> com.apple
-> com.democraticunderground
-> com.microsoft
-> net
-> gov
|
-> gov.house
-> gov.senate
-> gov.whitehouse
-> uk
|
-> uk.co
|
-> uk.co.apple
-> uk.co.microsoft

The root level (or zone) contains links to the authoritative name servers for all the TLDs. Then each authoritative name server for a TLD contains links to the authoritative name servers under it. In order for someone at the root level to censor democraticunderground.com, they would need to point authority for all of the com zone somewhere else. And that would be very quickly noticed.

ISPs run their own DNS server which cache the DNS hierarchy as to not have to ask the root name servers for every resolution answer. An ISP, either themselves or under order of government, certainly could block a domain by resolving it to the wrong IP address. But they can do this now and the US not having complete control over the root zone doesn't change that in any way by making it easier or harder.

china employs thousands to monitor what their people are doing.

into our brains. And do tell how this became a UN takeover? Have you looked outside for the black helicopters yet? I am sure they are coming for you.

U.S. cedes control of key Internet body

San Francisco — The U.S. government is relinquishing its control of the Internet's address system in a shift that may raise questions about the future direction of online innovation and communications.

The decision announced Friday begins a long-planned transition affecting the stewardship of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN. That's a not-for-profit agency launched in 1998 by the Commerce Department to govern the system that assigns website addresses and directs Internet traffic.

The department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, or NTIA, hopes to end its oversight of ICANN's Internet Assigned Numbers Authority by the time its contract expires in September 2015. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority administers the technology that keeps computers connected to the web and steers Internet traffic.

Proposals for a new ICANN stewardship will be accepted beginning next week at a conference in Singapore.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/usandworld/us-cedes-control-of-key-internet-body-b99225990z1-250422481.html

ICANN doesn't control the internet, nor does it control a single packet flowing across it.

What exactly are you worried about?

They only control things like top level domain names.

Packet routing and filtering is done at the service provider level. Packet filtering can be overcome by using VPN software. So even in places like China or Russia, it is possible to get unfiltered content. And for Americans overseas, hey too can use VPN software to appear to be physically located in the US to avoid geolocation-based filtering.

There is ZERO censorship that can result from moving ICANN to the UN.

NONE.

Any large corporation runs their own intranet, restricts the external destinations that their employees can reach, and protects itself with firewalls.

Any country can do the same.

And I thought it was black helmeted oppressors in blue helicopters.......Damn dyslexia

“While I certainly agree our nation must stridently review our procedures regarding surveillance in light of the NSA controversy, to put ourselves in a situation where censorship-laden governments like China or Russia could take a firm hold on the Internet itself is truly a scary thought,” Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/internet-transition-triggers-gop-backlash-104698.html#ixzz2wE3G3EeT

Our government may suck at a lot of things, but is still relatively good about respecting freedom of speech. At least much better than everybody else (including many European governments as well). Of course it figures that some of the pro-censorship crowd here would try to pin those defending freedom of speech as "Republicans".

I think it has its root in the same sorts of ideas as political correctness. People who think that shutting down speech that to them is negative will somehow benefit society.

i am doing quotes for broadband in some areas of the great plains this week

the best options look like t-1s at oh my god prices

we get all giddy because google is doing some neat stuff in parts of metro areas while big chunks of this county are stuck with not that much better than dial up and some still with dial up

we need to pull our head out of our collective ass, stop chanting usa usa and get some shit done

when American isp's roll out a tiered internet experience. You know how with cable you have to pay more to watch the better channels? That's how the internet will be.

But who am I to argue with right-wing talking points?

You can bet they would love to gain control of it.

I suspect that some in our nation feel the same but realize that our First Amendment makes controlling the internet challenging. It may be far easier to allow another body such as the UN to take charge.

And no borders? ICANN does not mean what you think it does.