ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    Board of Directors Security
    Public Participation Exposed for the Farce It's Always Been
    posted by michael on Friday December 01 2006, @04:21PM

    Bret Fausett has it right:

    In what has to be one of its most jaw-dropping repudiations of the value of public input ever, the ICANN Board has disapproved the .TRAVEL wildcard proposal two weeks before the public comment period was scheduled to end.

    Folks, it doesn't get any more clear than this what ICANN thinks of your input.

    Here's the public comment announcement, dated November 9, 2006:

    Under the terms of the Registry Services Evaluation Policy, following receipt of the RSTEP report, the ICANN Board will determine whether the proposed Registry Service creates a reasonable risk of a meaningful adverse effect on Stability or Security. ICANN invites public comments on the RSTEP Report through 18:00 UTC (10:00 PST) on 7 December 2006.

    And here's the Board's resolution of November 22, 2006:

    Review of .TRAVEL Wildcard Proposal

    Whereas, Tralliance Corporation submitted a request for a new registry service called search.travel under the Registry Services Evaluation Policy. The proposed service would insert a wildcard into the .TRAVEL zone.

    Whereas, ICANN conducted its review of the request and determined that although there were no significant competition issues, the proposal might raise significant security and stability issues and referred the proposal to the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel for further evaluation.

    Whereas, on 2 November 2006, the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel review team completed its report on the search.travel proposal. The report was posted for public comment.

    Whereas, based on the report of the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel, input from the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, At-Large Advisory Committee and other public comments, ICANN has concluded that the proposal creates a reasonable risk of a meaningful adverse effect on security and stability.

    Resolved, (06.85) that the Board agrees that the Tralliance Corporation search.travel wildcard proposal creates a reasonable risk of a meaningful adverse effect on security and stability and directs staff to inform Tralliance that the proposal is not approved.

    All of which has the folks at Tralliance wondering what happened:

    Tralliance President Ron Andruff said Thursday his company had yet to be informed of a decision and noted a public-comment period wasn't scheduled to end until Dec. 7. An ICANN spokesman had no immediate explanation.

    Of course there was no immediate explanation. What on earth could they say?

    Two additional points: First, I gather the Board members were not told that the public comment period had not ended. Which tells us (a) that the staff keeps the Board in the dark and (b) that the Board doesn't see looking into the public comments as a much of a priority--they sure didn't notice anything was missing, did they?

    Second, the public record here is rather light on the technical findings on which ICANN based its conclusions. Indeed, there don't appear to be any, do there?

    Will the Board reverse itself at its next meeting, or wait for the reconsideration request and then the lawsuits?




     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ 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. ]

     
      Related Links  
    · ICANN
    · has it right
    · the public comment announcement
    · here's the Board's resolution of November 22, 2006
    · has the folks at Tralliance wondering what happened
    · More Board of Directors stories
    · Also by michael
     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Public Participation Exposed for the Farce It's Always Been | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 1 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    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