| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
DoC will put IANA functions up for competitive bid
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 26 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Why in the world would anyone PAY to perform the IANA function?
There are three major parts of what IANA does.
The first is to provide a secretariat-like function for the IETF to handle the "IANA Considerations" sections of RFCs. For the most part this is largely clerical. However for some assignments the choices are sufficiently complex that some technical knowledge is useful. In really tough cases the RFC's are supposed to designate an IETF expert to do the hard work.
The second is to allocate blocks of IP addreses to the regional IP address registries. This job does require comprehension of what IP address allocation is all about - not a trivial matter - and what the policies (vague) are. (We are talking about huge blocks of IP addresses here, representing a kind of internet asset of significant value.)
The third is to chose who is the rightful operator of ccTLDs.
The first of these jobs rarely, if ever, generates controversy.
The second has a latent core of potential controversy but to date it has not actually happened. If we do get tighter on IPv4 addresses that may change.
The third is a function that mimics the job of governments recognizing one another - it is frought with peril.
None of these functions generates revenue.
The IETF really ought to be paying the costs for the first function and the RIRs for the second.
So, why would anyone pay the government to do this? Even a zero-dollar bid would mean that the winner is spending money to provide these functions.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
How Many People Know What IANA "Tasks" Are ?
You really have to call them "IANA Tasks",
that will show that you know what Jon Postel
called them. Even though he was referred to
as "The IANA" (like the Wizard of OZ), and some
referred to IANA as a company, it was a favorite
Postel game to call them "IANA tasks".
Given they are "tasks", that makes them all
trivial as stand-alone tasks, and many people can
do them or one person, or whomever feels like it
at the moment.
Between now and any claimed "rebid", you can bet
that the IETF.ISOC, ARIN and now the NRO.NET
will be secretly dividing up the "tasks" in
concert with ICANN. There will be nothing to
"rebid". It will be another run-around game.
Postel's cronies love those games, they are
sport for them.
Note: David Conrad has recently moved from ARIN
to ICANN to become the IANA Manager. He was one
of Jon Postel's main puppets. He knows the games
very well, and ICANN will no doubt profit from
the non-profit ventures (or tasks).
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
HPH: I see 3 options for moving forward: 1) We can gather this input and give it to the NRO EC so they can include it in the ASO response to ICANN and not replying directly from the AC; 2) We can put together a working group to prepare a draft paper to circulate among the AC and then send it to ICANN; or 3) Something in between.
HG: As to the timeline, the face-to-face meeting will be next Wednesday, so we have exactly one week.
HPH: This is precisely why we scheduled this conference today.
HPH: Is the NRO EC planning to send someone to the meeting?
RP: No, a paper will be prepared and sent in; nobody from the EC will attend. The Security and Stability Advisory Committee is not going to attend either, for similar reasons. They said that they're not going to attend because if this is an exercise then it's not a good idea; if it's supposed to be a brainstorming it's too short a notice and not very well organized; and if the purpose is to discuss a document then the document can be discussed by email.
SB: I have a question for RP: If we decide to go, is the NRO prepared to finance the trip?
RP: We’re prepared to pay something but we have not yet decided for how many people.
SB: I mean that if the NRO doesn't finance this then there's no point in continuing the discussion about going personally.
HG: ICANN must pay the bill.
RP: ICANN pays no money to the ASO, and we’re not about to accept it.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
"draw attention away from the real work."
NANOG Alert:
Some of the engineers are starting to
see the new 48-bit Routers connected, with IP
addressing in the MAC fields. They are confused
and need a diversion.
Vinton Cerf better "launch" another FUD campaign
about something. Humans are starting to figure out
what is going on, and it has nothing to do with
the root servers.
They want their 48-bit Provider Independent
addresses and ICANN can not supply them. They
forgot to place the order and the RIRs are
clueless.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
U.S. Government Starts to Design New .NET Via LAWS
The U.S. Government's numerous agencies and the
U.S. Congress now see what a travesty the
IANA-based Internet has become. It is a Wild West
show. Consumers have no protection, and lobbyists
from outside the U.S. dominate discussions on
how the U.S. should run their network, to benefit
those lobbyists.
The U.S. Government, in concert with the 10 or
20 major players (RBOC telcos, M$, V$, N$ and
banking, cable and the media companies) will work
to design a new .NET via laws. The ISOC and ICANN
will be off chasing their dreams with the UN/ITU.
That is a very good way to distract them.
Small ISPs will be cut-off, and many countries.
The FCC will step in and regulate the back-bone.
The Wild West show will end, and U.S. consumers
will benefit, and not have to be subjected to
the world lobbyists that want to destroy the
American network dominance, and replace it with
tin cans and kite string to third world countries.
http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/ news/11032005_Broadband.pdf
SEC. 104. ACCESS TO BITS.
(a) DUTIES OFPROVIDERS.—Subject to subsection
(b), each BITS provider has the duty—
(1) not to block, impair, or interfere with the
offering of, access to, or the use of any lawful content, application, or service provided over the Internet;
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
NRO.NET Moves [Off-Shore] to South America
South American telecommunication mafias are
famous for being laiden with cronyism and are
almost impossible to route around.
The ITU thrives in such a place.
Vendors find they are told, "this
is my cousin Hector, he **will be** your new
CEO in our country for your products and
services."
It should be no surprise that the RIRs are headed
to South America, to build up their base of
operations as **self-appointed** over-lords
of the address space.
U.S. telecom companies will just ignore them.
http://www.nro.net/documents/nro29.html
"The Number Resource Organization [NRO] is the coalition of Regional Internet address Registries [RIRs] which operate in the world today. It was formed in October 2003 by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed by the RIRs, and it is soon to be formally incorporated in Uruguay, as an International Non-profit Organisation. The NRO represents the collective experience and interests of individual RIRs and their communities, and provides an efficient interface to other parties interested in the work and responsibilities of the RIRs."
http://www.nro.net/documents/nro28.html
"The Number Resource Organization has deep respect for all positions: those with which we can identify the most; as well as those that seem furthest from our own ideas. We believe that all stakeholders and all governments have the right to defend their points of view on this issue, but beyond our respect for this right, we believe that it is time to recognize that there are matters on which agreement is not possible, and matters on which agreement is possible during the remaining period of the Summit.
There is clearly no agreement on a radical overhaul of current Internet Governance arrangements, or on the creation of purely intergovernmental mechanisms for Internet oversight. Not only is there no agreement among governments, but it is clear that the greater part of Civil Society and Private Sector organizations are united in opposition to such measures."
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
On U.S. Telcos and FCC Draining the IANA Swamp
In order to boot-strap their cartel, Jon Postel,
Vinton Cerf and Steve Crocker handed out FREE
blocks of address space, in what is called
The Swamp. Postel, Cerf and Crocker all went to
the same high-school in California. They built
their cartel on years and years of cronyism.
Now that the U.S. Telcos are building out the
broad-band back-bone, they are finding all sorts
of alligators in the swamp. The U.S. Congress
and the FCC are eager to help drain the swamp.
Companies like Verisign and Neustar are of
course eager to help, in the name of security
and stability, the Crocker's mantra. Cerf of
course has moved on from the telcos and is now
an ad-man for pay-per-click name junkies. The
swamp is left to fend for itself. The RIRs do
not want to go near it. Clueless UN newbies are
off distracted Ruling the Root, what a waste of
time that is.
|
|
|
|
[ 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
|
