See RFC 3675 for a discussion of some problems with something somewhat
what you suggest but enormously simpler and easier.
Thanks,
Donald
=============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
d3e3e3@xxxxxxxxx
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Bhakta Giridhari Damoda Das Jonadon
Brah Mahabarat <giridhari@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ________________________________
> Proposal for A Safe, Clean Internet
> ________________________________
>
> Before I disclose the concept proposed I will preclude a Big Brother
> Internet Censorship that prevents people from exercising free choice. That
> is, the concept does not intend to prohibit content in the public domain
> which is controversial and or considered in poor taste by some. No
> censorship enforcement is proposed- that is, no restriction on what people
> display on their websites is discussed. What is proposed is a world standard
> recognising the right to choose a clean Internet experience- ie, what is
> displayed (by choice) in a web browser. At the moment, this is left to the
> computer owner to determine, by means, if so desired, of Net Nanny software
> or similar. This works, but it is not as responsible as it could be.
>
> The Concept
> ________________________________
>
> An internet site registrar is declared, where owners of existing web sites
> or new web sites can apply to have their web site registered : the owner
> submits their site's URL, and the registrar reviews the site and it is
> admitted to the registrar if it contains anything but any of the following:
>
> Pornography of any form
> Gambling
> Sex-driven sites (excluding dating sites which require reasonable decorum)
> Racist sites
> Inflammatory sites
> Sites promoting or discussing illegal activity (as a general theme- the
> intent is never to prohibit open discussion: free speech is what makes laws
> so strong- they can stand examination)
> Sites which promote consumption of conciousness-altering substances,
> including caffeine, nicotine and ethanol
> {please add to list}
> ....
>
>
> Sites which are permitted:
>
> Personal Home pages, provided the content is not offensive, or derisive
> News sites
> Internet Search engines
> Wikipedia
> Selected YouTube content
> {please add to list}
> ....
> Anything you would not be alarmed by if your children were reading, for
> example.
>
>
> The concept is like Net Nanny, but the onus, motivation, and benefit is with
> (1) the content owners/authors and providers, (2) governments, to embrace
> that the Internet is an international forum which deserves sensitive
> attention so as to cultivate sound content to make a sound web experience,
> for (3) the people who live in the world.
>
>
> How does it Work?
> ________________________________
>
> The segregation is implemented at the Domain Name System (DNS) level (the
> level where the protocol and technology which converts a Uniform Resource
> Locator such as www.entyzero.net to it's Internet Protocol (IP) address is).
> The IP address is what is used to locate the computer hosting the content
> one wishes to browse.
>
>
> There are two steps:
>
> [1] DNS is revised to support acknowlegment of web sites that are
> registered. A new entry in a DNS lookup response which flags for those
> entries that are for registered sites is implemented.
>
> [2] Web browsers are revised to support a feature which selects whether to
> access only registered content. This feature incorporates sending web
> servers such as those hosting search engines a message which indicates only
> registered content should be displayed in search results if the browser
> feature is accordingly configured.
>
>
> When a web browser requests a name resolution for a web site, and the web
> browser is configured to only display registered content, the return from
> the DNS server includes a indicator which informs the web browser whether
> the requested address is registered or not registered. If the browser is
> configured to show registered content and the DNS server response indicates
> non-registered content, the browser displays an appropriate informational
> message along the lines of "Content is not registered." Also suggested is a
> prompt by the web browser asking whether to display the content anyway. In
> this case, should the operator of the computer elect to display the content
> anyway, NetNanny or equivalent softwares can still determine whether content
> is ultimately displayed.
>
> It is great that Net Nanny exists, and there is likely to be a difference of
> opinions about what is acceptable so to fine tune selection to cater for
> this Net Nanny and other content restriction software continue to serve an
> essential purpose. There can even be web sites which are registered but at
> the computer owner's or operator's discretion should still be restricted by
> Net Nanny or equivalent software.
>
> WHY?
> ________________________________
> The point is more to draw attention of the world to actively participate in
> creating a by-choice clean Internet. The world should be ready to accept
> responsibility and enjoy the benefit of actively promoting the freedom to
> choose a clean Internet experience. Net Nanny and equivalent softwares are
> still essential where a computer owner's discretion deems (some) site(s)
> that are not registered be nonetheless permitted. Further reason why Net
> Nanny and equivalent softwares are valuable is apparent if you look further
> down the horizon of this proposal, where Internet Ratings are implemented,
> similar to the Film Industry's Rating System: there can be difference of
> opinion about what is PG and what is M and what M rated content should be
> permitted.
>
>
> The technology which houses and provides the Internet is mature. The
> organisations which accept standards of that technology are well established
> and also mature. Mature enough, I think, to implement provisions to support
> higher quality choice. I invite governments of the world to discuss this and
> collaberate their interests, so that we live in a world where we don't just
> leave it to someone else, but instead actively promote a clean Internet
> experience implemented at a technology level- at a protocol level. In other
> words, a safer Internet by design.
>
> Giridhri