| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Will the World Summit Reinvent ICANN?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 10 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Puhleeze keep control of the DNS out of the hand of the U.N. You really want China, Russia, and Lybia telling you what domains you can and cannot register? You think it's bad now with ICANN, just wait until Tanzania has a say ... what a laugher.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
The question should not be "should the UN [or ITU] subsume ICANN?" Rather, the question should be "who is going to handle the necessary jobs of DNS and IP address stability?"
As I have pointed out in my blog entry "Will ICANN Reveal Its True Self To WSIS?" [cavebear.com] ICANN has been representing itself as focused on the narrow issue of ensuring that the internet's DNS and IP address systems are "stable". That representation is, unfortunately, not in accord with the real world in which ICANN has virtually no power over how the DNS roots are operated or how IP addresses are allocated.
This complete disconnect between ICANN's conjured appearance and its real-life substance causes businesses, internet users, and national governments to have concern that the DNS root and IP address systems are being operated by insular and relatively closed groups that have no accountability to the public. Fortunately at the present time these groups are well intended and highly capable. But governments, businesses, and internet users require something stronger than a fortuitious continuation of the status-quo.
ICANN has a long history of acts that are hostile to the inclusion of the community of internet users into ICANN's processes. It is no wonder that governments are skeptical of ICANN's ability to actually deliver a stable internet that takes into account the needs and desires of the community of internet users.
There is no doubt that a firm, fair, and capable hand is needed on the DNS root system and the IP address allocation system. ICANN is currently not doing that job.
So governments must, out of prudence and necessity, ask the hard question that the US Department of Commerce never faced - how can there come to be a truely accountable, publicly responsive, strictly functionally limited supervisory body over the core internet functions of DNS roots and IP address allocation?
[*] I hasten to add that in my opinion, there can be a multiplicity of DNS root systems, just as there can be a multiplicity of telephone directories, as long as they are consistent and do not clash.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
Huh?
by
Anonymous
on Sunday December 14 2003, @09:32PM (#12746)
|
|
|
What was unexpected about ICANN being a hot topic at WSIS? ICANN, CENTR, APTLD and other organisations have been going to WSIS preparatory committees all this year in lead up to this.
It was no surprise.
|
|
|
|
[ 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
|
