February 2015 - UANOG

Mobile Wi-Fi
by Volodymyr Litovka 15 Feb '15

15 Feb '15

привет, нужен портативный WiFi+CDMA(Интертелеком) раутер. Если у кого-то есть неиспользуемый - буду рад принять в помощь. Если нет - посоветуйте работающую модель. На сайте Интертелеком я был и про предложение Хуавей за 950 гривень (+470 гривень на счет) знаю. Имеет смысл покупать или можно дешевле пристроиться? Спасибо. -- /doka

4 3

Інсайд із Мінська 8-)
by Oleh Hrynchuk 15 Feb '15

15 Feb '15

http://ibigdan.livejournal.com/16631073.html Нема слів :)

4 3

громобойная дискуссия у людей :) Fwd: Re: [Internet Policy] Tim Denton vs Richard Hill on "Statism".
by Andrii Stesin 07 Feb '15

07 Feb '15

Vint Cerf воистину акбар :) чета ржу :) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Vint Cerf" <vint(a)google.com> Date: Feb 7, 2015 12:54 AM Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Tim Denton vs Richard Hill on "Statism". To: "William Smith" <wc.smith(a)me.com> Cc: "internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org" <InternetPolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> yep, that was the plan. worked like a charm. v On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:41 PM, William Smith <wc.smith(a)me.com> wrote: > As he is most capable of doing, Richard has made an impassioned and > well-articulated set of arguments that oppose the current mechanisms that > govern two very small aspects of the Internet, using his definition. Naming > and numbering are certainly important to the technical operation of the > Internet, but are rather inconsequential in terms of the broad and > expanding array of services that Richard includes in his definition. Such a > realization is inconvenient when the thesis is that the US Government > created the Internet as a strategic initiative to further its economic > interests. In his paper, Richard states: > > Great powers have historically used communication systems (transport > routes, telecommunications net- works) to further their economic and > strategic interests. This is certainly the case with the Internet: > its origins can be traced back to US military-funded research in the 1960s, > and subsequent deployment by the military and other government-funded > academic programmes. > > > Presumably the US Government began this initiative well before DARPA’s > public disclosure circa 1969. This tactical disclosure would have been part > of a much larger strategic plan, perhaps begun in the Roosevelt > administration. Bush's seminal article, "As We May Think > <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/>” > is likely the first evidence of this strategic initiative that has resulted > in the Internet. There may be earlier evidence but the two most likely > candidates, Jacquard > <https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Jacquard_loom.html> > and Babbage <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Babbage>, fail the US > hegemony test. An argument could be made that early US statesmen might have > begun this initiative during their revolutionary sojourns in France. I may > pick up this thread in the future but welcome others to investigate as well. > > Moving forward from ARPAnet, the next major tactical operation in this > strategic initiative would be for the US Government to feign a lack > interest in TCP/IP. This was cleverly done through it support for GOSIP in > 1990 by requiring suppliers of technology to the USG to demonstrate support > for OSI. The USG persisted with this plan until 1995 when FIPS 146-2 > permitted use of standards from ISO, ITU, and IETF as it became evident > that TCP/IP was winning the protocol wars. > > Machiavelli would have been proud to see his techniques employed in such > an inspired manner. (To maintain the facade that it preferred OSI, the US > DoD continued to employ OSI in its Defense Messaging System for some time.) > > Fast forward to today and one can’t help but be amazed at the skill the > USG demonstrates through its masterful manipulation of the many strings > necessary to control the activities of ICANN, the RIRs, and the IETF. > Additionally, it has managed to align diverse corporate interests into a > unified front that marches arm in arm with the USG > <http://www.wired.com/2015/02/fcc-chairman-wheeler-net-neutrality/>. This > is indeed the best of all possible worlds for the US, its corporate > interests, and its citizens. > > It should be clear to even the casual reader that Richard’s thesis is > correct. The USG, unlike other governments, wishes to “further their > economic and strategic interests” and that with the Internet, the USG’s > activities can be traced to the 1960’s. Using similar logic, I have > demonstrated that we can push the inception date for this strategic plan > back further, perhaps to the mid 18th century. > > I can’t imagine an alternative interpretation of the historical record. > > On Feb 6, 2015, at 10:43 AM, Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> wrote: > > I'm flattered that my polemic published in the 2015 State of Power is > getting so much attention. Since Mr Denton is mostly attacking his strawman > extrapolations of things that I didn't say in my article, I had not planned > to reply to his post. But I will reply to the bits that you post here. > > I don't know who or what "statists" are, so I cannot comment on what > bothers them. I'm certainly not bothered by the fact that the Internet has > increased access to information and freedom of expression. On the contrary, > I'm bothered by the fact that international law allows, at present, what I > consider to be excessive limitations on freedom of expression. I've > proposed in various forums that this be changed, see for example 7.1 at: > > > http://www.itu.int/en/Lists/CWGContributionmar2014/Attachments/25//CWG-Marc… > > > And I am bothered by imperialism and corporatism. > > I have no desire to take us back to the old days that Mr Denton > criticises, nor does my State of Power paper say that. Regarding ITU, it is > worth noting that the first international agreement that opened the way for > the present liberalized environment was the ITU's 1988 ITRs, and that the > 2012 ITRs more cleary state that international interconnections may be > based on commercial arrangements. > > My paper is hardly confined to a critique of ICANN. On the contrary, it > critiques states as well as private companies, stating: "It is tempting for > divil society to focus on denouncing the role of governments in regulating > the Internet, and in particular authoritarian governments that use it to > censor dissent. And it is important to do this, and to do it vigorously. > But civil society must also denounce the complicities between governments > and private companies in the North, whose abuses go largely unchecked. > There is also a need for more democratic governance arrangements that will > prevent monopoly profits and monopoly rents." > > I recognize that some people don't think that there are any abuses (except > maybe regarding copyright) and that there aren't any monopoly profits or > rents that need to be prevented (except maybe regarding copyright). Let's > agree to disagree on that. > > My paper also calls for pervasive use of improved encryption, which is > something that is opposed by most states. > > Mr Denton is of the view that my short paper does not engage the relevant > issues. Perhaps, but the endnotes include references to academic works > that, in my view, do engage the relevant issues. > > Best, > Richard > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* InternetPolicy [mailto:internetpolicy-bounces@elists.isoc.org > <internetpolicy-bounces(a)elists.isoc.org>]*On Behalf Of *Joly MacFie > *Sent:* jeudi, 5. février 2015 22:19 > *To:* internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org > *Subject:* [Internet Policy] Tim Denton vs Richard Hill on "Statism". > > > In case you missed it, Timothy Denton has published a detailed rebuttal of > purported Richard Hill "statism" on Circle ID > > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150203_true_faith_of_internet_governance_st… > > Concluding paras: > > It seems to me that what most bothers the statists is that the Internet > has broken up the tight controls that states used to be able to exercise > over thought, expression, and access to information. I could be wrong. It > might be simply a matter of distaste for the United States and its > commerce-driven governmental system. > Those of us who lived in the days of tightly-controlled telecommunications > and broadcasting structures, such as characterized the 20th century, have > welcomed the bracing possibilities of the Internet, which has linked > computers, and the human beings empowered by them, more effectively than > treaty-based obligations ever could. It is important not to romanticize the > Internet, but it is more important to get the big picture right. The > tightly controlled signals transport system of the 20th century was > shattered by the Internet. It is still possible to achieve police state > goals through communications, if that is your country's desire, but it has > become a lot harder. > If Mr. Hill could achieve his desire of taking us back to the ITU world, > the carrier-monopoly world, we would experience something like a > Counter-Reformation, and the closing of human possibilities from a > different direction than unbridled commerce. Personally I do not want to go > there, and most of the liberal market societies of this world do not > either. Nor do I want unbridled private sector monopolies of distribution > or of applications. There is a role for governments in this, and they > already have the powers they need to control monopolies and market power. > If Disraeli's maxim "power has only one duty — to secure the social > welfare of the people" is the criterion by which we judge government by the > ITU (or its equivalent) or government by ICANN, then my conclusion is that > Mr. Hill's arguments have failed to demonstrate the superiority of the ITU > model. I would go farther, and say that, by confining himself to a critique > of ICANN and the forces that sustain it, without reasonably examining the > statist alternative, he has failed to engage the relevant issues. > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > _______________________________________________ > To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, > please log into the ISOC Member Portal: > https://portal.isoc.org/ > Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. > > > > _______________________________________________ > To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, > please log into the ISOC Member Portal: > https://portal.isoc.org/ > Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. > _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.

1 0

Белые IP Freenet/O3
by Yuriy B. Borysov 04 Feb '15

04 Feb '15

Добрый вечер. А есть ли среди подписчиков листа абоненты Freenet/O3 (Киев)? В какой-то момент заметил, что домашнему маршрутизатору выдаётся серый IP. Мне казалось, что раньше был динамический, но белый. Действительно что-то поменялось в условиях подключений, или серые всегда были? Спасибо! -- WBR, Yuriy B. Borysov YOKO-UANIC | YOKO-RIPE

16 118

Desktop PC с ISA (!!!) слотами
by Volodymyr Litovka 02 Feb '15

02 Feb '15

Друзья, есть проблемка - одно из подразделений специального назначения использует программно-аппаратный комплекс на базе ISA (!!!) карточки (это не что-то промышленное, в магазине не продается). Нужно три компьютера с ISA на борту и чтобы на них мог взлететь XP. Можно с EISA, если в природе существуют переходники. Короче, нужно три комплекта, которые позволят использовать ISA-карты. Можете помочь? Спасибо. -- /doka

3 2

А подскажите что у нас с net.ua ?
by Vladimir Sharun 02 Feb '15

02 Feb '15

Всем привет :) Я вот тут как-то не обратил внимание, что net.ua обслуживается EUNIC'ом, который находится в Донецке. Дважды интересно как туда платить, если банки в Донецке не работают ? А налоги Координатор куда платит ? Может этот вопрос в ИнАУ адресовать (на всякий случай) ? Спасибо.

8 23