3 ms·
Does this mean that ARIN, lacnic, AFRINIC, RIPE NCC, and APNIC (the members of the NRO per https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/ https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/) are
by iudqnolq 7y ago
Does this mean that ARIN, lacnic, AFRINIC, RIPE NCC, and APNIC (the members of the NRO per https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/ https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/) are behind this? That makes no sense to me, I thought they were highly conservative bureaucracies heavily influenced by national governments. Do China and Russia, for example, want this to go through? Do we have any idea why?
Does anyone know anything about the NRO's goverence, on paper or in practice?
- mike_d 7y ago> Does this mean that ARIN, lacnic, AFRINIC, RIPE NCC, and APNIC (the members of the NRO per https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/ https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/) are behind this? Yes. They have taken the highly unusual step of expressing an opinion on the DNS system. > That makes no sense to me, I thought they were highly conservative bureaucracies heavily influenced by national government They are extremely conservative, which should add to the weight of this action. However they answer to their respective memberships, not governments - despite being "regional" registries they stay out of geopolitics for the most part.
- Tfd22 7y agoThe NRO is essentially just a brand the five RIRs use when they want to make public statements of this sort. So read this as a statement from the CEOs of these five orgs. With this request, I suspect they are more concerned with ensuring proper processes were followed within ICANN rather than the outcome. I think they are primarily concerned with maintining trust in the wider "Internet governance ecosystem" (that they are a part of). This is a concern as there is greater pressure from governments that want to make the case that the current model is not working and should be reorganised along UN/ITU terms.