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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    DoC will put IANA functions up for competitive bid | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 26 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.
    Re:On U.S. Telcos and FCC Draining the IANA Swamp
    by Anonymous on Monday November 14 2005, @04:57AM (#16496)
    Here's the latest draft of the Internet
    regulation bill, dated November 3rd. Note that, like earlier
    versions, it subjects all ISPs and VoIP providers to intensive
    Federal regulation and requires them to register before providing
    service. It also pre-empts state and local control over rights of
    way. For the draft text, see

    http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/news/11032005_ Broadband.pdf
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:On U.S. Telcos and FCC Draining the IANA Swamp
    by Anonymous on Monday November 14 2005, @05:06AM (#16497)
    Private Address Space from ARIN, etc.
    Public Address Space from the FCC and U.S. Telcos

    Many ISPs only have Private Address Space and
    that is not Guaranteed to be Routable. Ask ARIN.

    > The registries (including IANA as their root) should provide just
    > that, a place to register the use of number resources to avoid collisions.
    > I'm thinking that "private" number spaces should probably be used
    > advisedly if not deprecated outright.

    RIR's are taking heat (or some finger pointing atleast) for allocations
    that don't appear in the public route table. There are many reasons why
    the allocation might not appear in the table, I'm not convinced that
    measuring the public table is any real way to measure 'in use' status for
    ip space, though it's one gauge people seem to be using. If there is a
    legittimate need to use some ip space NOT in a public manner, one for
    which 1918 might not be appropriate, perhaps having a registration method
    'in region' (with the RIR's who already have the machinations to do ip
    number registrations and delegations) would make some sense?

    I recall, I believe, a policy proposal 1 or 2 ARIN's ago that would have
    included some form of 'private' or 'public' stamp/category on ip
    registration data? Perhaps reviving that, or making a new one, would be in
    order?

    How do the currently allocated folks feel about sending in registration
    info now? Assume no payment, or minimum payment for registration 'work'
    in included? Would we be able to get all of the relevant parties to sign
    up/register/keep-up-to-date ?

    Example registered but not 'routed': 7.0.0.0/8

    Would we want to change whois output to include the 'pub/priv' flag?
    [ 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