Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    A milion Dot Info domain names registered last week | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 10 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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.
    .INFO is Attempting to Prevent Removal by ICANN
    by Anonymous on Friday October 08 2004, @10:02PM (#14313)
    .INFO is Attempting to Prevent Removal by ICANN

    The theory is that if you get enough of a
    constituency built up in a market test, you
    can then move forward with production service.
    Keep in mind that TLDs in the ICANN root are
    just in a market trial. It is a place where new
    TLDs can be tested and possibly fail. .WEB is
    a good example of one that was tested and did not
    make it.

    Unfortunately, Vinton Cerf and John Klensin and
    some of the other ISOC insiders view .INFO as
    a threat to .ORG, which funds the kind of
    people they like to see calling the shots.
    In an effort to derail .INFO and prevent it
    from moving forward beyond the market trial
    Cerf and the boys at the IETF have cooked up
    all sorts of technical reasons why a 4-letter
    or more TLD is not reliable. (See Karl
    Auerbach's website for comments on how he
    views ICANN to be responsible for DNS reliability)

    Because of the long history of ISOC insiders
    having one agenda (keeping their funding) and
    then making up reasons why some decision was
    made to support their agenda, it is a natural
    next step for the merged ISOC-IETF to advise
    ICANN to remove .INFO from their root-servers.
    ICANN of course does not run any root-servers
    and only gives advice to the root-server
    operators on the content. That is another one
    of those CYA arm's-length structures that the
    ISOC insiders are so skilled at creating.
    They always can point in some other direction
    for the reason why a decision has been made.

    The buck stops with Vinton Cerf and the bucks
    come from Vinton Cerf. He has always arranged
    it that way. Since .INFO is not charging for
    names, that does not put any bucks into Vinton
    Cerf's control to manipulate. That will certainly
    not win the .INFO registry any points. Cerf
    has already been telling the trademark lobby
    what they want to hear which is that .INFO does
    not work. All .INFO can do is attempt to get
    so many advocates that Cerf can not kill .INFO.
    With the trademark lobby .INFO may not have a
    chance, no matter how many names they register.
    In fact, that may hurt them, because there
    will surely be names that match a .COM name. .WEB could have taken the same approach. FREE .WEB names would have helped to grow the base
    of users and Cerf could not have dismissed .WEB
    as easily as he did. Now Cerf has of course
    forgotten all about his comments in 2000 that .WEB would be "in the next round". (Which was
    supposed to be March 2001). Even though .WEB
    is a three-letter name, the ISOC insiders can
    always come up with another reason why it does
    not match their criteria.

    In the end, .COM will be the only TLD that has
    a chance to survive. .NET will soon be moved
    to the control of Cerf's Serfs. They will be
    all over it, regulating it, and chasing away all
    of the users. They will of course be telling
    everyone not to regulate it or tax it. They of
    course reserve that for their tribe of chosen
    ones, who live like royalty off of the .ORG taxes.
    Since .INFO is not producing any revenue, it
    will have to be found to be not worthy of the
    tribe's blessings and be voted out of the roots.

    Survivor ICANN - Coming to South Africa SOON

    Note from Donald Trump to Vinton Cerf
    Vint, Your Fired !!!
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Did .INT or .INFO get the .I abbreviation TLD ?
    by Anonymous on Saturday October 09 2004, @04:44AM (#14314)
    Did .INT or .INFO get the .I abbreviation TLD ?

    The wireless operators are in the process of
    deciding on what TLDs map to the single-letter
    TLDs. Their users do not want to type a lot of
    letters on those small PDA-cellphone keypads.

    If .INFO has a lot of names, would it be the
    more natural choice over .INT ?

    Each user could determine the mapping but that
    does not easily allow people to use their .I name
    on web-pages. .INT was recently [secretly] moved from the ITU
    back to ICANN. Even though ICANN claimed they
    would never operate a Registry, they now
    operate the .INT TLD. Does ICANN plan to head
    off the delegation of .I to .INFO owners ?

    Is I.NET going to decide on the fate of .I ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    .COOP - Yet Another 4-Letter TLD ICANN Will Kill
    by Anonymous on Saturday October 09 2004, @06:39AM (#14317)
    .COOP - Yet Another 4-Letter TLD ICANN Will Kill

    "Community Broadband Network director Malcolm Corbett, who co-invented .coop when he was Corporate Affairs Director at Poptel in 2000, commented: “This brings a painful chapter to a close and I wish OSG every success in taking .coop forward.” "

    Another one of Esther Dyson's failed EDventures.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    .INFO Proves the Registry Can Operate for FREE
    by Anonymous on Saturday October 09 2004, @07:58AM (#14318)
    .INFO Proves the Registry Can Operate for FREE

    The Registrars collectively benefit and collectively
    can operate the Registry. Six or eight Registrars
    could easily each supply a Registry Server and
    make sure the TLD operates 24x7 with 99.999% uptime.

    ICANN should handle .NET and .COM at the same
    time. The $6 annual fee that Registrars pay to
    the Registry should be removed, or paid to the
    six Registrars selected to operate the Registry.

    That of course will not happen because the
    ISOC would have to come in, to coordinate, and
    take their cut of the action. NRO.NET and ARIN.NET
    and the rest of them would also be there.
    The .NET taxes would go up, not down. Someone
    has to pay for all of the travel junkets.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    And the domain contracts were agreed to by whom?
    by jberryhill on Saturday October 09 2004, @02:16PM (#14320)
    User #3013 Info
    In other words, Enom is fraudulently representing that unwilling third parties have entered into contracts to which those third parties have not agreed.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The ICANN Toll-Road - 25 Cents Per Transaction
    by Anonymous on Sunday October 10 2004, @06:02PM (#14323)
    The ICANN Toll-Road - 25 Cents Per Transaction

    http://www.icann.org/financials/budget-fy04-05-06o ct04.html#invoicing

    Invoicing of Transaction-Based gTLD Fees

    In recognition of various accounting methods and business models employed by registrars, multi-year registration fees can be paid in one of two ways at the option of each registrar.

            * The fee may be paid complete during the calendar quarter of the transaction. For example, in the case of a three-year registration, the registrar may elect to pay the 75-cent fee at the end of the quarter in which the registration occurred. (Current fees.)
            * The fee payable for the registration years beyond the first year can be deferred and paid year-by-year. For example, in the case of a three-year registration, a 25-cent fee shall be paid at the end of the quarter in which the registration occurred, a 25-cent fee will be paid one-year after the first payment, and a 25-cent fee will be paid two years after the first payment. (Deferred fees.)

    Registrars will be asked if they wish to pay fees on a current or deferred basis prior to calculation and sending the first invoice. If no response is received, the full, multi-year transaction fee will be invoiced. Registrars can make one election between current and deferred fee schedules, that election will be effective for the remainder of fiscal year.

    Registrars are dropping out.

    http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/regis trars/msg02294.html

    "The big questions is can just a few large registrars bare the entirety of
    the 3.8M registrar fees? Well, they don't have to. No registrar will pay
    more than 20K in ICANN fees, which will leave ICANN in worse shape.

    If you believe that ICANN was sufficiently staffed for its mandate -- we
    will test this and many other things as we witness the first real full
    business cycle in our industry.

    now, I'm going to tell ICANN that they can stuff my application for
    accreditation and I'm not going to make it operational. Anyone need an
    accreditation, its in-queue with a 90 day ETA -- just name your price =)"
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    by Anonymous on Saturday October 23 2004, @06:24PM (#14390)
    Worth what was paid for them!
    [ 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