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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    ITU on ICANN | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 7 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.
    The ITU, like nature, abhors a vacuum
    by KarlAuerbach on Tuesday December 21 2004, @01:23PM (#14596)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    It seems only reasonable that a body, such as the ITU, a body that has spent more than a century doing actual technical coordination of the telephone and telegraph systems, should be concerned that ICANN has utterly abandoned its responsibility to engage in the technical coordination of DNS and IP addresses.

    The internet is running along full speed ahead but the no hand, much less ICANN's hand, on any of technical controls.

    Because ICANN has abandoned its role of oversight the technical stability of the DNS is left to a few dedicated individuals who, despite the best of intentions, are mortal.

    It is completely understandable why the ITU should want to step in and repair the vacuum of technical oversight created by ICANN.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The Next Phase - Route Filtering by IP Address
    by Anonymous on Tuesday December 21 2004, @05:47PM (#14598)
    The Next Phase - Route Filtering by IP Address

    People running around in meat-space to the
    ICANN and ISOC/IETF Road-Shows seem to be unaware
    of what the average user is facing in dealing
    with the naive end-to-end Internet architecture.
    People seem to be **assuming** that the average
    user (especially Joe American Consumer), is
    going to be interested in seeing more spam,
    viruses, and pop-ups from people and companies
    both in and outside of the U.S. That is not
    the case. That is not the consensus. People are
    fed up with the liberal-academic-socialist
    models of "please expose all of your systems
    to a bunch of geeks to infect as they please."

    The solution is of course going to be massive
    walled-gardens. Filtering at the IP address
    prefix-level is the only way to solve the major
    problems. That of course is going to free up
    a very large amount of 32-bit address space and
    make it non-routable to-from the walled gardens.
    In a strange "two negatives make a positive"
    sort of way, this will help with the *perceived*
    address shortage problem, which ICANN and the
    RIRs use as a carrot in attracting players like
    the ITU.

    If the ITU plays any **active** role, it may
    be as a publisher of the list of IP address
    blocks that it has decided are NOT ROUTABLE.
    In the old days, the RIRs claimed to tell people
    what blocks were in use and routable. Now
    people want to know what blocks to turn off.

    It will be interesting if the ITU steps forward
    and tells people that entire /8s are not
    recommended to be routed. They can effectively
    turn-off major regions of the world, that seem
    to be major sources of problems. Some people
    think that sort of filtering should be done
    via the name-space, removing a ccTLD as example.
    That does not work. The filtering has to happen
    at the address-space level. ICANN does not
    seem to have much interest in address-space
    management. Most of the focus has been on names.
    The ITU could play a very active role [along
    with the FCC] in address space (spectrum)
    management.

    The average netizen's cable-TV-like-box is of
    course the ideal place to do some of the
    filtering. They will be happy it just happens
    and may even pay for better protection. The
    the netizens build better walled-gardens.
    Many people in the ISOC grateful-dead-like
    groupie tour-group are not going to like what
    has become an essential next phase.

    major companies are of course poised to help
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    .INFO Moving to 2-Letter .IN Abbreviation TLD
    by Anonymous on Tuesday December 21 2004, @08:55PM (#14601)
    .INFO advocates, aware of Vinton Cerf's claims
    that 4-letter TLDs do not work, can now move
    to the 2-letter Abbreviation TLD, .IN

    Afilias, the facade company for the .INFO
    Registry (other companies do the real work),
    is also now running .IN

    The ITU may try to claim that all 2-letter
    TLDs fall under their management. Eventually,
    all of the 2-letter TLDs will be taken, in
    use.

    Will the Abbreviation TLD for .TRAVEL be .TV ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ITU blog
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @02:02AM (#14603)
    User #2810 Info
    The ITU is sufficiently clued as to blog [itu.int] its activities. It is the height of absurdity to imagine ICANN doing likewise. It is likewise absurd that Paul Kane, Chair of CENTR, is the contact for numerous ccTLD's. As the contact under ICANN's rules is supposed to reside in a given ccTLD, Kane must have numerous residences.

    I have generally been a supporter of the idea that the ITU take on many of ICANN's functions, but this particular trial balloon needs to be shot down. I hope saner heads (like Richard Hill and Robert Shaw if they're still with the ITU, they dwarf anything ICANN has to offer) will prevail. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    "Internet to ITU: Stay Away from My Network"
    by Anonymous on Wednesday December 22 2004, @05:47PM (#14612)
    It looks like the ICANN Taliban are starting to
    worry that their cash-cow and travel junkets[1]
    could be in jeopardy. It is interesting to see
    that the ISOC Taliban thinks they speak for the
    "Internet". If there has been one bit of consensus
    come from the ICANN Process or the ICANN Framework
    it is that "the Internet Community" wants to get
    as far away from ICANN and the Taliban as they
    can [tm. TheyCANN]

    [1] http://www.circleid.com/article/842_0_1_0_C/

    "Internet to ITU: Stay Away from My Network"

    "The backbone of the ITU's contention rests on the premise that something called the Next Generation Network and the contention that this network will act as one big bug fix for all the problems created by current inter-networking technology."

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Still Time for the ITU to Get an IP Address Block
    by Anonymous on Wednesday December 22 2004, @05:59PM (#14613)
    201 NJ
    202 DC
    203 CT
    204 Manitoba
    205 AL
    206 WA
    207 ME
    208 ID
    209 CA
    210 TX
    212 NY
    213 CA
    214 TX
    215 PA
    216 OH
    217 IL
    218 MN
    219 IN
    224 IL
    225 LA
    228 MS
    229 GA
    231 MI
    234 OH
    239 FL
    240 MD
    242 Bahamas
    246 Barbados
    248 MI
    250 British Columbia
    251 AL
    252 NC
    253 WA
    254 TX
    256 AL
    260 IN
    262 WI
    264 Anguilla
    267 PA
    268 Antigua/Barbuda
    269 MI
    270 KY
    276 VA
    281 TX
    284 British Virgin Islands
    289 Ontario
    301 MD
    302 DE
    303 CO
    304 WV
    305 FL
    306 Saskatchewan
    307 WY
    308 NE
    309 IL
    310 CA
    312 IL
    313 MI
    314 MO
    315 NY
    316 KS
    317 IN
    318 LA
    319 IA
    320 MN
    321 FL
    323 CA
    325 TX
    330 OH
    334 AL
    336 NC
    337 LA
    339 MA
    340 US Virgin Islands
    345 Cayman Islands
    347 NY
    351 MA
    352 FL
    360 WA
    361 TX
    386 FL
    401 RI
    402 NE
    403 Alberta
    404 GA
    405 OK
    406 MT
    407 FL
    408 CA
    409 TX
    410 MD
    412 PA
    413 MA
    414 WI
    415 CA
    416 Ontario
    417 MO
    418 Quebec
    419 OH
    423 TN
    425 WA
    430 TX
    432 TX
    434 VA
    435 UT
    440 OH
    441 Bermuda
    443 MD
    450 Quebec
    456 NANP area
    469 TX
    473 Grenada
    478 GA
    479 AR
    480 AZ
    484 PA
    501 AR
    502 KY
    503 OR
    504 LA
    505 NM
    506 New Brunswick
    507 MN
    508 MA
    509 WA
    510 CA
    512 TX
    513 OH
    514 Quebec
    515 IA
    516 NY
    517 MI
    518 NY
    519 Ontario
    520 AZ
    530 CA
    540 VA
    541 OR
    551 NJ
    559 CA
    561 FL
    562 CA
    563 IA
    567 OH
    570 PA
    571 VA
    573 MO
    574 IN
    580 OK
    585 NY
    586 MI
    601 MS
    602 AZ
    603 NH
    604 British Columbia
    605 SD
    606 KY
    607 NY
    608 WI
    609 NJ
    610 PA
    612 MN
    613 Ontario
    614 OH
    615 TN
    616 MI
    617 MA
    618 IL
    619 CA
    620 KS
    623 AZ
    626 CA
    630 IL
    631 NY
    636 MO
    641 IA
    646 NY
    647 Ontario
    649 Turks & Caicos Islands
    650 CA
    651 MN
    660 MO
    661 CA
    662 MS
    664 Montserrat
    670 CNMI
    671 Guam
    678 GA
    682 TX
    701 ND
    702 NV
    703 VA
    704 NC
    705 Ontario
    706 GA
    707 CA
    708 IL
    709 Newfoundland
    710 US
    712 IA
    713 TX
    714 CA
    715 WI
    716 NY
    717 PA
    718 NY
    719 CO
    720 CO
    724 PA
    727 FL
    731 TN
    732 NJ
    734 MI
    740 OH
    754 FL
    757 VA
    758 St. Lucia
    760 CA
    763 MN
    765 IN
    767 Dominica
    770 GA
    772 FL
    773 IL
    774 MA
    775 NV
    778 British Columbia
    780 Alberta
    781 MA
    784 St. Vincent & Grenadines
    785 KS
    786 FL
    787 Puerto Rico
    801 UT
    802 VT
    803 SC
    804 VA
    805 CA
    806 TX
    807 Ontario
    808 HI
    809 Dominican Republic
    810 MI
    812 IN
    813 FL
    814 PA
    815 IL
    816 MO
    817 TX
    818 CA
    819 Quebec
    828 NC
    830 TX
    831 CA
    832 TX
    843 SC
    845 NY
    847 IL
    848 NJ
    850 FL
    856 NJ
    857 MA
    858 CA
    859 KY
    860 CT
    862 NJ
    863 FL
    864 SC
    865 TN
    867 Yukon, NW Terr., Nunavut
    868 Trinidad & Tobago
    869 St. Kitts & Nevis
    870 AR
    876 Jamaica
    878 PA
    880 NANP area
    881 NANP area
    882 NANP area
    901 TN
    902 Nova Scotia
    903 TX
    904 FL
    905 Ontario
    906 MI
    907 AK
    908 NJ
    909 CA
    910 NC
    912 GA
    913 KS
    914 NY
    915 TX
    916 CA
    917 NY
    918 OK
    919 NC
    920 WI
    925 CA
    928 AZ
    931 TN
    936 TX
    937 OH
    939 Puerto Rico
    940 TX
    941 FL
    947 MI
    949 CA
    952 MN
    954 FL
    956 TX
    970 CO
    971 OR
    972 TX
    973 NJ
    978 MA
    979 TX
    980 NC
    985 LA
    989 MI
    [ 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