Subject: [Int-area] New Version Notification for draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations-00.txt (fwd)

From: Lenny Giuliano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 14:44:39 -0500 (EST)

FYI, this draft proposes to document the considerations for regional 
Internet blocking, a topic of increased interest in the last few weeks.

Comments and questions are most welcome.

Thanks,
Lenny

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 12:05:03 -0800
From: [email-masked]
To: Lenny Giuliano <[email-masked]>, Melchior Aelmans <[email-masked]>,
     Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: New Version Notification for
     draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations-00.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Tony Li and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations
Revision:	00
Title:		Regional Internet Blocking Considerations
Document date:	2022-03-07
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		13
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations-00.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations/
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations

Abstract:
    Geopolitical conflicts can cause policy makers to question whether or
    not blocking the Internet connectivity for an opposing region is a
    constructive tactic.  This document provides an overview of the
    various technologies that can be used to implement regional blocking
    of Internet connectivity and discusses the implications of these
    options.  This document does not advocate any policy or given
    blocking mechanism, but does attempt to articulate the implications
    of these blocking technologies for policy makers.  The document also
    intends to help inform policy makers from countries who could be
    exposed to such blocking techniques on the implications of these
    methods.

The IETF Secretariat

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 10:17:30 +0100

This is my comments:

I would not call it simply 'conflict' even though that is indeed a more 
neutral term that helps in many conversations.  But also, calling it 
anything else than plain 'war', might represent actually taking parts.  
There are many other names given to it, and one can be even fined if not 
abiding.  I simply refuse that fine, so I call it a war.

In the 'disconnection methods' - one would add other aspects too:

- my anti-virus blocks access to some web sites.  An anti-virus also 
tells 'false positives'.  That is all about disconnection.

- some web sites (including very high level of parts taking part in war) 
are not even using CAs.  Some CAs are not in browsers.  That is 
disconnection too.

- a sysadmin might disconnect a cable (PHY level) because of wanting to 
have protection, because the risk of cyber attacks is so high these days.

- bombs might create disconnections.

In the 'Implications' of disconnection one should list this one:

- if  AIEA does not have the radiation level at some war sites via 
communication channels (typically over the Internet, I believe) then 
population at large is at risk.  The disconnection might lead to it, and 
it is a criteria at AIEA.  That is an information I repeat from them.

--------------

These are my pointers right now: news agencies display some times news 
about Internet situation in Ukr-Rus space.

Then there are these mentioned on the ISOC Internet Policy email list 
recently:

https://twitter.com/netblocks (but it seems twitter might be blockedin 
Russia)

https://www.accessnow.org/keepiton/#problem

https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages

https://www.pch.net/resources/Papers/Multistakeholder-Imposition-of-Internet-Sanctions.pdf

https://connect.geant.org/2022/03/04/geant-association-statement-on-the-russian-aggression

Sorry - I am not spamming.

I will not participate to this IETF meeting (neither online, nor 
in-person) because of several reasons: risk of covid propagation, risk 
of travel (the flightradar24 displays a big hole East of Europe which I 
suspect it might have chances to impact the travel in Europe), and other 
personal opinion.

Yours,

Alex

Le 09/03/2022 à 20:44, Lenny Giuliano a écrit :
> URL: 
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations-00.txt
> Status: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations/
> Htmlized: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations
>
>
> Abstract:
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 10:57:29 +0100

Le 10/03/2022 à 10:17, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
>
> This is my comments:
>
>
> I would not call it simply 'conflict' even though that is indeed a 
> more neutral term that helps in many conversations.  But also, calling 
> it anything else than plain 'war', might represent actually taking 
> parts.  There are many other names given to it, and one can be even 
> fined if not abiding.  I simply refuse that fine, so I call it a war.
>
> - some web sites (including very high level of parts taking part in 
> war) are not even using CAs.  Some CAs are not in browsers.  That is 
> disconnection too.
>
> - a sysadmin might disconnect a cable (PHY level) because of wanting 
> to have protection, because the risk of cyber attacks is so high these 
> days.
>
> population at large is at risk.  The disconnection might lead to it, 
> and it is a criteria at AIEA.  That is an information I repeat from them.
>
>
> --------------
>
>
> of travel (the flightradar24 displays a big hole East of Europe which 
> I suspect it might have chances to impact the travel in Europe), and 
> other personal opinion.
>

(sorry, correction - 'risks', not 'chances', to impact travel)

Alex