IANA Country-Code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs)
"We're Moving Backwards" on ICANN Transparency
posted by michael on Thursday August 04 2005, @05:22PM

Bret Fausett at Lextext, notes in .IQ Redelegated And No One Knows Why that ICANN's transparency -- never great -- is shrinking:
We're moving backwards, not forwards. And the ICANN staff is almost three times bigger now than it was in February, 2002, so this is not a question of inadequate resources.



U.N. Internet summit draws rights groups' fire

 
  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
· .IQ Redelegated And No One Knows Why
· More IANA stories
· Also by michael
 
"We're Moving Backwards" on ICANN Transparency | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 105 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.
was .iq redelegation just like any other?
by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Friday August 05 2005, @12:07AM (#15791)
User #2810 Info
Iraq also became a GAC member prior to last April [icann.org].

For much history and analysis of the .iq redelegation see Kieren McCarthy's excellent series of articles [theregister.co.uk]. There was a flurry of non-news about this just over a year ago, most reporting on the non-redelegation in similar fashion [nwsource.com]. There was little openness then either:

More than one group has applied to take over as ".iq" registry operator, said ICANN's general counsel, John Jeffrey, refusing to specify the number.

So they still haven't specified the total number of claimants (other than that it was greater than one), let alone who they were. From public statements there were at least three parties who intended to make a claim. Whether they or more did, or how IANA chose between/amongst them, remains unknown.

As apparently only one claimant was anointed, indeed represented (when he asked ICANN to redelegate the ccTLD), by Paul Bremer, who in turn (that is, later) appointed their principals, said claimant then going on to be the successful claimant, one might wonder if this is at least part of the reason for the secrecy, and perhaps the abnormally long (even by ICANN standards) delay.

I know I'd be seriously steamed if the redelegation of Canada's .ca to CIRA [www.cira.ca] had followed the US Ambassador to Canada's request to IANA/ICANN that it redelegate .ca, which in turn was followed by the US Ambassador to Canada creating CIRA, followed by the US Ambassador to Canada appointing the Board of CIRA. Ya, I know Bremer wasn't Ambassador throughout this period but that makes negligible difference to my parallel.

My steam level would decrease very little even if it was all done openly, even if CIRA was the only claimant, and even if there was demonstrable local internet communittee support. The latter would never happen here in Canada (we'd more likely kick out said Ambassador and recall our Ambassador to the US in protest). How on earth can it be claimed for Iraq, which seems near the brink of civil war? The whole process has been unseemly, inappropriate, secretive, over long, and top down. Interesting how similar ICANN/IANA on .iq seems to be to the US on Iraq. -g

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Debabelizing the Troll
by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Friday August 05 2005, @12:00PM (#15815)
User #2810 Info
So to deal with the IETF.ISOC conspiracy we have to work as hard and as smart as we can. So we should hang around ICANNWatch spewing out reams of off-topic drivel and that'll stop them in their tracks.

You've got to give the troll credit for working hard, unfortunately subtracting the smart credit we wind up at .Net less than zero. Surely we are all doomed. -g

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 61 replies 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 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.