Attached: 1 image
Queer.af mastodon instance has been shut down by the Taliban (not a joke, they seized the domain name).
https://akko.erincandescent.net/notice/AenoDMPN0SdVXSq9ZY
ICANN is going to become a UN agency before they kick out states as stakeholders. Their status, though, is not derived from that but by silent agreement from the ISPs handing out servers following ICANN’s root servers as default, they’d have to fuck up quite badly for that institutional inertia to change, and any replacement on that level is absolutely bound to respect ccTLDs as control over their own ccTLD is a national security issue for all states, and push come to shove they’d legislate that domestic ISPs have to hand out servers that respect at least their own ccTLD.
And there’s nothing wrong with that. Plenty of letter combinations to choose from especially now that there’s vanity domains. If this was the early 2000s e.g. lemmy.world would simply be lemmy.net.
ICANN is going to become a UN agency before they kick out states as stakeholders.
You seem to be absolutely right. The conduct of the Afghan registry goes square against the ICANN base registry agreement, yet they won’t do squat against ccTLDs, as evidenced per the email I received (see my edit).
ICANN is going to become a UN agency before they kick out states as stakeholders. Their status, though, is not derived from that but by silent agreement from the ISPs handing out servers following ICANN’s root servers as default, they’d have to fuck up quite badly for that institutional inertia to change, and any replacement on that level is absolutely bound to respect ccTLDs as control over their own ccTLD is a national security issue for all states, and push come to shove they’d legislate that domestic ISPs have to hand out servers that respect at least their own ccTLD.
And there’s nothing wrong with that. Plenty of letter combinations to choose from especially now that there’s vanity domains. If this was the early 2000s e.g. lemmy.world would simply be lemmy.net.
You seem to be absolutely right. The conduct of the Afghan registry goes square against the ICANN base registry agreement, yet they won’t do squat against ccTLDs, as evidenced per the email I received (see my edit).
Thank you for your comment.