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)


     
    Alternate Roots IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we're in)
    posted by Michael on Thursday July 12, @08:53AM

    Image Online Design (IOD), who run the .web registry, has released a Policy Statement endorsing Stuart Lynn's policy paper on unique roots. The paper argues that .web shouldn't be seen as an alternate root at all -- it supports a unique root, and its goal is to be part of it. It all sounds a bit desperate, particularly as I've gotten a fair amount of email that translates the Lynn paper as a declaration that new.net and .web can take a long hike -- ICANN won't shy away from creating name conflicts, no matter how old or how big the alternate root may be.



    Under the rules of the game laid out by Dr. Lynn, .web's hope of winning a spot in the next round of gTLD applications turn on its jumping through the hoops without making any reference to its customer base, its length of service, or its experience. Under the circumstances, a little kowtow right now may be about the only thing it can do.

    MAP Letter Asks for Delay in .us Giveaway | Congress Holds Hearing on Whois  >

     

     
      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  
  • Image Online Design
  • Policy Statement
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we're in) | Login/Create an Account | Top | 151 comments | Search Discussion
    Threshold:
    The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them.
    Technical difficulties?
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Friday July 13, @02:47PM (#1316)
    User #4 Info | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin
    We appear to be having some technical difficulties with our software. Several people have reported that their comments are being entered as "anonymous" even when they are logged into the site. If this has happened to you and
    • you have checked to make sure you are logged in to the site;
    • you are certain you are not blocking cookies;
    • you have not reported it to us previously,
    please drop a note to the webmaster stating your operating system, your browser name and version, and anything else you think we should know about the incident. It is currently unclear what we can do about this, short of changing to a newer version of the PHP-Nuke software...which is not something we will do lightly as so much can go wrong.

    -Michael Froomkin (if this message is anonymous, I've reproduced the problem...)

    IOD has been "In"....and never "out"
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Thursday July 12, @12:28PM (#1223)
    User #2940 Info
    By posting this Position Paper, Image Online Design has sent a message: We are a part of the internet, and would like see a healthy, robust DNS and not a divided one. The question is will everyone finally listen, including the those in ruling bodies that govern our DNS system? Image Online Design is NOT an "alternate root"...I have even misspoken on this a few times, but wish to drive this point home. They have for the last 5 years worked for a Single Root System, and have never strayed from this reachable goal. It is for everyone's benefit.

    What I hope will happen is that dialogue between ICANN and Image Online Design will begin. I think as a long time observer in this process it is time for ICANN to sit down with Image Online Design to work together on this single root concept. I say this because Image Online Design actually helped create ICANN via board disscussions so as to foster the idea of a single root. Now its time to show good faith, as Image Online Design had faith in ICANN back in 1997. Will they reciprocate? We will see. Much could be gained for such talks, as it seems rumours and inneundo get thrown around like the stuff out of the Enquirer. It is definitely time for ICANN to "get out of the offices" and go down and see for yourselves Image Online Design's operation, as they offered to do during the first round of TLD selections. Then you can see for yourselves that they are committed to a single root system.

    I hope this could happen. I really do.

    Regards,

    Gregory W. Krajewski
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by cambler (IOD) on Friday July 13, @03:50AM (#1274)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    I'm curious how you might know this.

    Actually, IOD's performance proposal beats these specifications in all respects.
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by cambler (IOD) on Friday July 13, @05:54AM (#1300)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    Yes, IOD has a shared registry system, and committed to opening it to registrars on day-one. Claims to the contrary are based on our original application, which was revised before the board meeting when it was made apparent to us that taking upwards of a year was not acceptable.
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by cambler (IOD) on Friday July 13, @03:53AM (#1276)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    No need to argue the merits of why $15M is needed. The simple answer is yes - please see our ICANN application from the first round for credit and financial information.

    We did, and still do meet ICANN's requirements.
    Re: IOD needs to develop SRS
    by cambler (IOD) on Friday July 13, @05:54AM (#1301)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    IOD has an SRS now.

    Anything else?
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by cambler (IOD) on Saturday July 14, @06:51AM (#1326)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    We currently charge $35 for 2 .Web domains. That comes to $17.50 per domain. That is our registrar retail price. Compare that to most registrars, and you'll find that it's about the median.

    To registrars, however, we initially proposed a $15 price. We also indicated that we would be more than willing to negotiate lowering that price in order to make it more competitive, if necessary.

    It is to note that Afilias, with their $5.15 price to registrars, shows a net loss on their balance sheet for the first 4 to 5 years of their operation. We felt that this was irresponsible fiscal policy, and could lead to the failure of the registry, especially in today's market. Remember, these projections by Afilias were made in the middle of the boom-market. Things have changed.
    Image Online Design has always tried to foster con
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Saturday July 14, @04:02PM (#1356)
    User #2940 Info
    Their most recent paper reflects that. In that they are simply trying to work within the established communities to foster a single root authoritative public root for the domain name system.

    Image Online Design is not trying to parter with anyone. THEY are saying we have registry that has proven to be robust, and one that does have community support. THEREFORE, we intend to continue to foster support, and seek solutions within the working groups, and yes, ICANN.

    It's all about consensus and that is the way it should be. I would like to think ICANN feels the same way.

    This doesn't mean that IOD is against anyone else (in my opinion). That is where this story is getting lost. They are for building a DNS that will be accepted by the public, for if the public does not have confidence in our DNS, they will not seek to use it for personal use, business, etc. That is why any talk of replacing IOD's dot web registry with someone elses is not good policy (the dot biz situation proves that--especially with all the plug-ins floating out there)....Just as it would not be good policy (in my opinion) for IOD to suggest that the DNS handled under a "multiple authority" type scenario.

    I went long, but I hope you got my point. IOD is not partnering with anyone, they are not against anyone. They simply wished to clarify where they stand in relation to how the DNS should operate. That is responsible, and sound policy. And obviously there is almost 6 years of experience to back that paper up. They know what they are talking about!!!

    Gregory W. Krajewski

    Re: .BIZ has lots of partners
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Sunday July 15, @05:38AM (#1388)
    User #2940 Info
    Your comments: ".Biz is 10 times more solid than .INFO."

    I thought we were discussing IOD's CLARIFICATION paper, not dot biz, not dot info and not even new.net.tld.tld???

    Oh, well, things have deteriorated into a domain reseller forum. Well, if I can have the liberty to digress this once, I will jump into the fray here.

    "biz" has several meanings in many countries. I won't go into this any further.

    "biz" is slang for business. Businesses HATE slang!

    "biz" is a detergent that cleans stains.

    ok. I am done.

    Back to the discussion at hand. Image Online Design will show others how to operate a registry including the ones already in the USG root.
    Nice commentary....from an Anonymous poster....
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Saturday July 14, @04:20PM (#1357)
    User #2940 Info
    I am here to say that Image Online Design has done everything it said it would do. It is on their FAQ page in plain english.

    Let me refresh you on some of the highlights:

    *They are working towards getting uploaded in the "A" root. (note: they submitted an application with a $50,000 application fee--I call that being serious)

    *They are working on new features for their registry and website (Their registry system is second to none and most recently they have added a discussion board to help answer questions and continue to foster community input---again, IOD is consensus based.

    Now is far as getting into the "A" root. That is up to ICANN. They submitted a superb application, that showed testing that they had done, showed that they were finanically backed (in the millions), and would provide these services at a realistic cost.

    I believe IOD painted a true picture in their application. I suggest everyone take a look at the new registrars (dot info and dot biz) prices....Then go take a look at the old applications you can readily find on ICANN disscussion board (archived 5 Nov 00).

    Again, with IOD's recent paper and their TLD application showing a vision for market changes, etc. I think you will find that they are more than capable of taking their registry into the "A" root.

    They are steady in my book, and anymore that is a company I will always support. Their positions NEVER change. Post from Jul 96

    So your dribble about them not living up to handling the dot web registry shows how little you know about Image Online Design AND its supporters.

    Regards,

    Gregory W. Krajewski
    Re: It is all about money (they have the money)
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Saturday July 14, @04:37PM (#1363)
    User #2940 Info
    It was on their application how much they have in backing.

    So it's not about the money. IF that were the case, dottv should have gotten dot pro.

    Nonetheless, I do agree that money does play a factor in their somewhere, but just not in IODs case.

    Re: None of this matters
    by cambler (IOD) on Saturday July 14, @05:48PM (#1370)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    There is no renewal with .Web. IOD has stated that renewals will not happen until after they're in the root.

    IOD cannot be bled. They have plenty of money in the bank, are still getting new registrations anyhow, and have said all along that they will wait it out.
    Re: None of this matters
    by cambler (IOD) on Saturday July 14, @05:50PM (#1371)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    I should say "we" :-)

    Shows you how long I've been awake now, when I start writing posts like I've been writing marketing papers (in the third person).

    Sigh. Time to get some sleep.
    Re: Mission Impossible (By whose standards??)
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Sunday July 15, @05:25AM (#1386)
    User #2940 Info
    Sir/Ma'am (not sure which gender),

    You make a simple statement with no facts. So let me CLARIFY your position since you did not. You think that IOD's mission is impossible because of ICANN??? Sorry but ICANN is more than just ICANN. Their is an entire community that will either support IOD or not....ICANN should then act on whateve consensus was built. IOD has building a consensus for 5 years! Therefore they are not on a mission that is impossible....and if I may play on your words, they are on a mission "most" probable.

    Why?

    *They have funding (in the millions per their app)
    *They have supporters up the (new word) whazood. Some, even myself write congress on a regular basis. Congress is a part of the community, so it is hoped that ICANN will recognize that IOD offers much to the DNS.
    *They have a system whose concept has been proven, time and time again (testing is at the heart of any registry system, and IOD has done them--i.e fault tolerance)


    Gregory
    I stand by what I say
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Sunday July 15, @12:41PM (#1398)
    User #2940 Info
    NameSlinger™ is visionary as far as the Alternate Roots go. They have acted in a responsible manner so as not to collide with existing TLDs in the alternate domain space. Unlike New.net....

    Now if you are trying to draw a parallel about my support for NameSlinger™ and Image Online Design you can't. They are two different companies headed in two different directions. One will be a leader of the alternate roots, and the other a leader in the USG roots. No one said, that you can't have an alternate root. In fact Stuart Lynn even suggested that experimental roots are needed.

    Isn't nameslinger an experiment, non-colliding, non threatening entity (especially when they are not colliding with anyone).....

    SO thanks for slinging up my post. I stand by it, and the ones I post in support of Image Online Design.

    Gregory W. Krajewski
    Re: Does IOD support EPP ?
    by cambler (IOD) on Sunday July 15, @01:52PM (#1399)
    User #36 Info | http://www.webtld.com
    Would this be the EPP that's on an IETF standards track?

    If so, why not check and see who was at the Washington DC working group meeting a few months ago. I think my name is pretty near the top.

    What's the point here? Do we partner? Do we support this? Do we support that?

    The answer to all of the questions is either yes, or yes if our customers want it.

    Pretty weak attempts to find *something* to complain about.
    Image Online Design Existed Before ICANN.....
    by Gregory_Krajewski on Sunday July 15, @04:09PM (#1402)
    User #2940 Info
    That would be dumb to turn off their namesevers since they have been an operational registry since 1995. ICANN took things (partially) over in 1998, a full 3 years after Dot Web through Image Online Design went live.

    You have to remember the internet did not start in 1998 when ICANN took over the resposiblities of the DNS.

    ICANN did put out new policy that effects Image Online Design since they took over, which Image Online Design is complying with, but never has ICANN told Image Online Design to turn off the switch.

    Also nothing was written in the application info to get a contract in the "A" root this last round that said, "No one that existed before us cannot apply, or be accepted".....For one they couldn't say that because the community (as whole) would need to form a consensus on this issue.

    Image Online Design then (as I see it--my opinion only) is defined by how it has operated since ICANN took things over from IANA. They adhere to the UDRP polices (new--ICANN)....They formulated a TM protection plan (new--ICANN)...WHOIS policy (new--ICANN) etc, etc.

    All these new policies were created through the working groups, then the supporting org's, then passed on to ICANN (at least this is how it is supposed to work in a perfect world). Image Online Design has participated in the working groups, attended meetings so to even suggest they are working outside of ICANN is ludicrious. They don't have to be ICANN accredited to be "in". All ICANN accreditation is that the company is allowed to sell dot com, dot net, dot org, etc. Image Online Design is a Dot Web Registry awaiting accreditation (again, this is how I see it...my opinion only, and not necessarily IOD's)

    Gregory
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by ldg (jandl@sybercom.net) on Monday July 16, @11:55PM (#1421)
    User #2935 Info
    Dontcha love it when someone says "trust me?"

    Lynn says, "We're here for the public interest—to support the public interest. What we do, including how we state the introduction of new TLDs, always has that public interest in mind and community in mind. We can't prevent anyone else from engaging in alternative roots for their own private gain. But we should understand that it is not something that is directed to the public interest."

    Well, give me a break. Every time I hear "what's good for the corporations is good for the public," I gag. Someone please tell me where I can find a lack of intent for private gain anywhere in the ICANN framework? NSI/Verisign? IBM? MCI/Worldcom? Neulevel? Afilias?

    Now show me where the UDRP is for the public good as opposed to the private gain of the IP industry?

    Now, please point out where the small registries in the other roots (most of which either charge very little or nothing for domain names) are in it for self serving motives.

    There is nothing wrong with making a profit on services rendered. What is so wrong with the ICANN picture is hypocrisy, greed, lust for power and misleading the public. Deliberate breaking the DNS just to make the point that they have the power to do so should be ample proof that ICANN is not there for the public good.

    Problem is that by the time the public awakens to the fact that they have been bilked, it will be too late.

    Watch the tanks, now. They've begun to roll down the street.


    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