| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Syracuse University White Paper on TLD additions
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 11 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
i almost fell out of my chair when, at the recent 'ICANN, ccTLD, and the Legacy Root: Domain Name Lawmaking and Governance in the New Millennium' conference at cardozo law school, former/erstwhile ICANN staffer andrew mclaughlin chimed in with something to the effect that 'there's a lot of sympathy within ICANN for this kind of approach.' indeed: that's why the current thinking involves a top-down taxonomic approach to doling out sponsored TLDs.
cheers,
t
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
It's interesting to see RFC1591 used in such an um... unique and novel way.
It's no surprise to see:
1) the Postel IANA applications ignored yet again
2) priority given to Stuart Lynn's whim over the applicants in 2000
3) a .dns TLD with "the capacity to solve many of the current naming problems associated with DNS by
creating permanent and stable object identifiers" which completely misses the point of DNS and creates an artificial and arbitrary control over language use - the only good idea in the explanation is .ISBN which was missed entirely
4) auctions and illegal lotteries which have been proven failures in the past
5) "lesser developing countries" not using existing cctld processes, but rather being rationed by lottery
6) eBay used as a best case delegation model!!!
7) separating the name from the registry harming technical innovation which completely ignores emerging peer-to-peer solutions and advances in distributed databases not to mention that this is a critical requirement in decentralizing DNS like the IP/router registries
You've got your facts somewhat correct, but the conclusions and execution is a total disaster waiting to happen.
The bottom line is that this plan is another terrible process geared to favor ICANN insiders.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
First of all, the things that ought to be up for grabs are "slots" in the root zone file - the winner getting to pick whatever name string he/she/it wants (modulo prior use by someone else) *after* winning.
Second, it ought to be a lottery - a fixed price for a ticket - the internet isn't just a playground for the rich. There are major social interests that don't happen to be endowed with cubic sums of money. Even with a lottery the rich can buy lots of tickets in order to improve their chances, but, unlike an auction, at least a lottery leaves the little folks with a chance.
And of course we won't mention the word "lottery" in those places where it isn't allowed.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
Back in 1996, auctioning was debated and rejected overwhelmingly. This is hardly an original idea.
Anyway the original IAHC says it's a Really Bad Idea, and it's one of the few things they got right:
"With regard to the lottery mechanism, Mr Crocker conceded that the selection of registrars, all of whom must first meet an objective set of business and technical criteria, may not be ideal, but said this mechanism was finally favoured by the Committee because it was fair and equitable. An auction giving the right to become a registrar to the highest bidder would unfairly favour wealthy companies, said Mr Crocker, while selection of registrars by the Committee or another body would have been fraught with the possibility of legal complications."
http://www.itu.int/newsarchive/projects/dns-meet/D NS-PressNote.html [itu.int]
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | | 2 replies beneath your current threshold. |
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
|
