<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>Milton Mueller &#45; CircleID</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Postings from Milton Mueller on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2012, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2012-01-26T08:27:00-08:00</dc:date>
		

		
		<item>
			<title> We Are All Internet Exceptionalists Now (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/we_are_all_internet_exceptionalists_now</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/we_are_all_internet_exceptionalists_now</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its defeat call attention to a delicious irony in public discourse on Internet governance. Even those who don't want the Internet to be an exception from traditional forms of regulation and law are forced to admit that something <em>new and exceptional</em> must be done to bring it under control, such as massive departures from traditional concepts of territorially bounded sovereignty through the use of <em>in rem</em> jurisdiction. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/we_are_all_internet_exceptionalists_now">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2012-01-26T08:27:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> TLD Expansion: ICANN Must Not Back Down (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/tld_expansion_icann_must_not_back_down</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/tld_expansion_icann_must_not_back_down</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ICANN's plan to open up the domain name space to new top level domains is scheduled to begin January 12, 2012. This long overdue implementation is the result of an open process that began in 2006. It would, in fact, be more realistic to say that the decision has been in the works 15 years; i.e., since early 1997. That is when demand for new top-level domain names, and the need for other policy decisions regarding the coordination of the domain name system, made it clear that a new institutional framework had to be created. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/tld_expansion_icann_must_not_back_down">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2011-12-29T13:57:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Of Canaries and Coal Mines: Verisign's Proposal and Sudden Withdrawal of Domain Anti-Abuse Policy (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20111014_verisign_proposal_sudden_withdrawal_of_domain_anti_abuse_policy</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20111014_verisign_proposal_sudden_withdrawal_of_domain_anti_abuse_policy</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Too many techies still don't understand the concept of due process, and opportunistic law enforcement agencies, who tend to view due process constraints as an inconvenience, are very happy to take advantage of that. That's the lesson to draw from Verisign's proposal and sudden withdrawal of a new "domain name anti-abuse policy" yesterday. The proposal, which seems to have been intended as a new service to registrars, would have allowed Verisign to perform malware scans on all .com, .net, and .name domain names quarterly when registrars agreed to let them do it. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20111014_verisign_proposal_sudden_withdrawal_of_domain_anti_abuse_policy">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2011-10-14T11:53:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Russia and China Propose UN General Assembly Resolution on "Information Security" (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110920_russia_china_propose_un_resolution_on_information_security</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110920_russia_china_propose_un_resolution_on_information_security</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On September 12 China, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan released a Resolution for the UN General Assembly entitled "International code of conduct for information security." The resolution proposes a voluntary 12 point code of conduct based on "the need to prevent the potential use of information and communication technologies for purposes that are inconsistent with the objectives of maintaining international stability and security and may adversely affect the integrity of the infrastructure within States..." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110920_russia_china_propose_un_resolution_on_information_security">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2011-09-20T12:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Who Wrote Those ICANN Papers, Anyway: The European Commission or the Government of Iran? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_wrote_those_icann_papers_anyway_european_commission</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_wrote_those_icann_papers_anyway_european_commission</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The most notable thing about the EC Papers on ICANN, which were leaked by Kieren McCarthy last week, is that they are designed to completely subordinate ICANN as an institution. We have not seen such a comprehensive attack by a government on ICANN since the World Summit on the Information Society. One can infer that this is payback for the Board's decision to not treat the EC's views, expressed in its Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), as binding instructions rather than as nonbinding advice. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_wrote_those_icann_papers_anyway_european_commission">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2011-09-06T11:19:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> How to Discredit Net Neutrality (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20101202_how_to_discredit_net_neutrality</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20101202_how_to_discredit_net_neutrality</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Tuesday (November 30) Internet backbone provider Level3 publicly accused cable-based ISP Comcast of trying to thwart competing video services delivered through the internet. Comcast was, according to Level3, suddenly choosing to charge it more because of its carriage of Netflix traffic. The accusation was consciously framed to raise net neutrality alarms. It appeared as if a cable TV giant was using its control of internet access to make access to a competing, over the top video service more expensive... Then the full story came out. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20101202_how_to_discredit_net_neutrality">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-12-02T13:52:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Domain Names as Second-Class Citizens (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100812_domain_names_as_second_class_citizens</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100812_domain_names_as_second_class_citizens</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A new book by Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis (Lecturer in Law at the University of Strathclyde) provides a passionate yet legalistic and well-researched overview of the legal, institutional and ethical problems caused by the clash between domain names and trademarks. This is really the first decent book-length treatment of what is now a decade and a half of legal and political conflict between domain name registrants and trademark holders. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100812_domain_names_as_second_class_citizens">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-08-12T14:01:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> At the ARIN Meeting (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/at_the_arin_meeting</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/at_the_arin_meeting</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have been attending the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) meeting in Toronto. ARIN is one of the RIRs, i.e., the Internet address registry and policy making authority for North America. Although I have observed and participated on RIR lists for some time and interacted with RIR representatives at ICANN, WSIS and IGF, this is the first time I have been able to attend a meeting. I'm glad I did. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/at_the_arin_meeting">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-04-21T14:46:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Cyber-Spin: How the Internet Gets Framed as Dangerous (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/cyber_spin_how_the_internet_gets_framed_as_dangerous</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/cyber_spin_how_the_internet_gets_framed_as_dangerous</link>
			<description><![CDATA[At the beginning of this year, a set of powerhouse organizations in cybersecurity (CSO Magazine, Deloitte, Carnegie Mellon's CERT program, and the U.S. Secret Service) released the results of a survey of 523 business and government executives, professionals and consultants in the ICT management field. The reaction generated by this survey provides an unusually clear illustration of how cyber-security discourse has become willfully detached from facts. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/cyber_spin_how_the_internet_gets_framed_as_dangerous">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-04-08T14:43:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Will Stonewalling on .xxx Be Beckstrom's First Big Mistake? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100222_will_stonewalling_on_xxx_be_beckstroms_first_big_mistake</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100222_will_stonewalling_on_xxx_be_beckstroms_first_big_mistake</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The .xxx controversy is a legacy of the Bush era. In the dark period of WSIS and the Iraq invasion, ICANN's independence was fatally undermined when a political appointee of the Bush administration, in response to an email campaign from rightwing groups in the Bush "base", issued a direct threat to Paul Twomey that if ICANN approved the .xxx Top-Level Domain (TLD) it would not put it in the root. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100222_will_stonewalling_on_xxx_be_beckstroms_first_big_mistake">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-02-22T09:54:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Will Obama Re-Nationalize ICANN? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090517_will_obama_re_nationalize_icann</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090517_will_obama_re_nationalize_icann</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Speaking at a Technology University of Delft conference on the internationalization of infrastructures, Professor Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger made some unique and provocative observations about the future of the ICANN tether to the U.S. government. Mayer-Schoenberger was trying to predict the position of the three main players: the EU, the US and China... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090517_will_obama_re_nationalize_icann">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-05-17T08:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Memo to John Markoff: There are No "Do Overs" in History (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090302_memo_john_markoff_no_do_overs_in_history</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090302_memo_john_markoff_no_do_overs_in_history</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Think for a moment of the enduring legacy of African slavery in America. Think of the way it tainted this country's culture and politics; think of the bloody Civil War, the ghettos... What if we could roll back the clock and ensure that our society was "designed" so that slavery was never permitted and never happened? ... But what if I told you that my computer science lab was working on a "new Internet" that would solve all the terrible security and privacy problems of the existing one? Would you find this claim more credible than a proposed retroactive solution to the problem of slavery? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090302_memo_john_markoff_no_do_overs_in_history">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-03-02T21:23:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> One Good Outcome from the Wall Street Journal: Google Flap (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20081219_one_good_outcome_wsj_story</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20081219_one_good_outcome_wsj_story</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Monday the Wall Street Journal published an article alleging that Google was trying to arrange a "fast lane for its own content" with telecom carriers and contending that Google and Professor Lessig were in the midst of changing their position on network neutrality policy. The WSJ reporters received a lot of flak for the piece -justifiably so. There was no real "news" in this news article. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20081219_one_good_outcome_wsj_story">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-12-19T07:32:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Is It Time to Create a Market for IPv4 Addresses? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_it_time_market_ipv4_addresses</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_it_time_market_ipv4_addresses</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It's fascinating to watch the Internet technical community grapple with policy economics as they face the problems creating by the growing scarcity of IPv4 addresses. The Internet Governance Project (IGP) is analyzing the innovative policies that <a href="http://www.arin.net">ARIN</a>, <a href="http://www.ripe.net">RIPE</a> and <a href="http://www.apnic.net">APNIC</a> are considering as a response to the depletion of IPv4 addresses. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_it_time_market_ipv4_addresses">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-13T19:54:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Homeland Security Department Was Warned About DNSSEC Key Ownership and Trust Issues (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/homeland_security_warned_about_dnssec</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/homeland_security_warned_about_dnssec</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The <a href="http://blog.internetgovernance.org">Internet Governance Project</a> has unearthed a consultancy <a href="http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/12/19/3419292.html">report</a> to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that makes it clear that the issue of root signing and DNSSEC key management has been recognized as a political issue within the US government for long time. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/homeland_security_warned_about_dnssec">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2007-12-19T09:42:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>
