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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    WGIG will Reassess - or Reassert? - Governments' Role in Internet | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 9 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.
    There are No Root Servers - Too Late
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 21 2004, @11:20AM (#14192)
    What a sad display of out-dated, clueless, views.

    The Root Servers can be turned over to the UN
    as worthless relics. They are not needed. The
    boxes (Access Points) being deployed do not
    use Root Servers.

    The UN is getting very bad advice from a small
    group of uninformed, out-dated, regulators who
    have made a career traveling around attempting
    to crush the life out of the Internet.

    E.T. Phone Home...RUN RUN...Ride like the wind...FLY AWAY
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Distractions from the ICANN Back-Room Deals
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 21 2004, @08:09PM (#14194)
    The entire U.N. escapade is a distraction from
    the back-room deals going on at ICANN and the
    large Registrars. ICANN now only makes disclosures
    long after the deals are made and via very obscure
    announcements. In some cases, Verisign/NSI or one
    of the other players makes the first disclosure
    and then an "Oh, by the way" is released by ICANN.

    Two recent diclosures should clue people in to
    what is going on behind the scenes. One is the
    recent "Oh, by the way" from ICANN about the
    Verisign and Tucows moves to restructure the .COM
    name industry as an auction market. Another
    disclosure is the IPv6 info which should make
    people aware that .NET will become a hidden
    private network for .NET professionals only.

    All of this converges into what consumers will see
    as a .COM-only name space. .COM essentially
    becomes the root, but also the **hook** on which
    other changes can be made. With the auction
    model quietly introduced behind the scenes
    ICANN has essentially solved the problem of
    how to introduce new TLDs. With .NET safely
    partitioned from the .COM evolution, there will
    be no chance of any security and/or stability
    concerns.

    It should be totally obvious to the most casual
    ICANN-watcher how the back-room deal makers
    have decided how to use the .COM base for the
    new, massive, TLD expansion (and auction). That
    partly explains why ICANN has been sitting on
    their hands with respect to applications for
    so-called sTLDs. With a .COM-only world and
    all names eventually under .COM, such applications
    make no sense.

    With a .COM-only clean sweep, Verisign will of
    course be looking for ways to get their ICANN
    puppet to help them leverage that large base
    of names into new revenue sources (with of
    course some donations to ICANN). Before that
    can happen, they have to get .NET out of the
    picture and bury .ORG and the other TLDs from
    the proof-of-concept market trials which of
    course can be described as failures, and swept
    under the rug. People are faced with at least
    another year of game-playing and deal-making
    between Verisign and ICANN before any real
    forward motion will happen. During that time,
    there will of course be no new competition for
    Verisign and all other competition will continue
    to fade away.

    In a few years, ICANN will of course sing their
    praises about how they introduced competition
    and more choices for the consumers. Verisign
    will be there on stage with a big hug and thanks
    for keeping any real competition out of the
    arena. Along with Verisign will be all of the
    big Registrars and the TLD Managers who ride
    the auction market to the top.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The Spooks Gather in DC to Finalize the .NET Plan
    by Anonymous on Wednesday September 22 2004, @05:30AM (#14195)
    NANOG: Oct. 17-19
    ARIN: Oct. 20-22
    Reston, Virginia

    61st IETF - Washington, DC, USA
    (November 7-12, 2004)
    ===

    It should be obvious to ICANNwatchers that the
    U.S. Government spooks are manipulating the
    important .NET decisions in this election year.

    It is interesting that the United Nations would
    attempt to stick a clueless nose into the tent
    like a camel. Sending key weapons of mass
    distraction (WMDs) off to keep them busy will
    keep them out of the decision-making process.
    Sending ICANN off to entertain (stall) the world
    will also help to make the manipulations easier.
    Australians do a nice job in the entertainment
    business, distracting people with nonsense.

    Placing ARIN.net (note the .NET extension) at the
    center of the .NET transition [from Verisign back
    to Verisign and others], will help to bring the
    ISPs into line and will be the most effective
    way to force [coerce] IPv6 to happen. All of that
    will be too technical for ICANN or the UN to
    understand, it will be tied up with cyrpto
    experts, signed DNS zones, and other behind the
    scenes stuff consumers do not need to get near.
    The insiders and the U.S. Government will then
    have their own internal network with .NET as the
    center-piece and IPv6 showcased as the ISOC's
    grand and glorious contribution to humanity.

    With .NET safely out of the way, behind the
    scenes, and only accessible to "professionals",
    Verisign will be free to take .COM to the masses
    to "create" TLDs. There are several ways to do
    that, some of the ways generate more revenue
    for Verisign and some of the ways do not. Guess
    which ways (or way) Verisign will select. They
    of course will need their partner Microsoft to
    share in the revenue and make it all happen.

    Consumers will have their "passports" their
    "wallets", etc. There will be micro-payments, pre-paid Internet, and other proxy-gateway
    services to bridge the new.net to any of the
    legacy stuff on the old .NET (run by the USG).
    Big winners will be "search engine companies"
    that use (and do not pay) the existing search
    companies for info and then re-package it, on
    the fly, for their consumers. That happens in
    the consumer's cable-TV-like box.

    You ask about ccTLDs ? "Oh, by the way" they
    are off on some proxy somewhere. People do not
    go there any more. No wonder, the leaders of
    ccTLDs, who have been clued-in, are resigning.

    With Bush re-elected, the .NET plan will roll
    out much more quickly than with Kerry, but, it
    will not change. The new merged CIA-HLS-NSA-ETC
    czars will be pulling the strings of whatever
    puppet is elected. Also, the software (.CODE)
    can not easily be changed. Lessig was right.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Why is 6.NET not available ?
    by Anonymous on Wednesday September 22 2004, @06:41AM (#14196)
    All of the single-letter .NET names have now been sold, except one. Why is 6.NET not available ?

    http://www.a.net
    http://www.b.net
    http://ww w.c.net
    http://www.d.net
    http://www.e.net
    http: //www.f.net
    http://www.g.net
    http://www.h.net
    h ttp://www.i.net
    http://www.j.net
    http://www.k.ne t
    http://www.l.net
    http://www.m.net
    http://www. n.net
    http://www.o.net
    http://www.p.net
    http:// www.q.net
    http://www.r.net
    http://www.s.net
    htt p://www.t.net
    http://www.u.net
    http://www.v.net
    http://www.w.net
    http://www.x.net
    http://www.y. net
    http://www.z.net
    http://www.0.net
    http://ww w.1.net
    http://www.2.net
    http://www.3.net
    http: //www.4.net
    http://www.5.net
    http://www.6.net <<<<<<< Why is 6.NET not available ?
    http://www.7.net
    http://www.8.net
    http://www. 9.net
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    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