| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
 IANA Redelegates .ht (No Advance Warning, As Usual)
posted by michael on Tuesday January 13 2004, @02:47PM
IANA Report on Redelegation of the .ht Top-Level Domain".
All the parties having agreed to this redelegation, it appears to be kosher. But once again, and louder than ever: WHY CAN'T WE GET ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED REDELEGATION REQUESTS???
ICANN (acting as IANA) claims it consults with the relevant communities. As far as one can tell this means, the existing delegate (although even here, IANA may ignore what he says), the government, and maybe some local ISOC luminaries or perhaps a major ISP or two. I've never met anyone else who admits to being consulted. (Have you?) The local public (not to mention any foreigners who may be registrants) gets no hint from ICANN as to what's going on. There is simply no reason to believe that IANA/ICANN inevitably knows who should be consulted about a re-delegation. And it's not necessarily just the people at ISOC or the people that the local government says need to be consulted.
Notice and comment. Not a radical concept these days -- outside ICANN.
|
|
|
|
| |
[ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]
|
|
| | |
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
IANA Redelegates .ht (No Advance Warning, As Usual)
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 1 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
|
When I was on the board of directors of ICANN it was a rare day when the factual information surrounding a redelegation cumulated to more than a tiny hill of beans.
In general I got the impression that "staff" used redelegation as an excuse to travel (one "staff" person, for instance, had an annualized travel rate of one international venue per week.)
I found "staff" to be unwilling, or unable, to provide concrete information regarding some relegations, which led me to conclude that ICANN may sometimes risk being used as a tool for political machinations by competing groups in some countries.
Here in the US we at least know that the Dept of Commerce has no clear legal authority to deal with matters concerning DNS and IP addresses. (Which hasn't stopped 'em from asserting control.)
But in countries such as the Sudan, Afghanistan, Congo, etc, governmental authority has been, to put it mildely, in flux and it is hard to tell whether those requesting redelegation are really the properly credentialed representatives of the national authority or are simply those who have convinced ICANN's "staff". (There is absolutely no reason to believe that anyone at ICANN has ever acted dishonestly in any of this. The matter springs, I believe, from a misplaced neo-Victorian e-paternalism exhibited by some past "staff" members.)
In any case, it was not the board who was making the decision - it was "staff" that made the choice; the board merely rubber-stamped without demanding that staff provide a well structured written document of facts and criteria and demonstrating the chain of reasoning.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
