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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    .org | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 13 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: .org
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 24 2002, @06:20AM (#9352)
    Presumably ISOC got advance notice that caused them to send out this email 24 hours ago:

    Member ID [1354359]
    23 September 2002

    Dear Internet Society Members,

    As you are probably aware ISOC is one of the top contenders in the
    bid to be the new manager of the .ORG registry. If chosen, these
    responsibilities will be carried out by a new company separate from
    ISOC called the Public Interest Registry (PIR). Although PIR and
    PIR's Board are to be separate and distinct from ISOC, the ISOC
    Board does have the responsibility to appoint the PIR Board. As
    the time allotted between the ICANN board decision and the expected
    start-up date is quite short, we believe it to be an appropriate
    time to take the next steps, re: appointing this board.

    In addition to the Board, PIR will have an Advisory Council
    composed of leaders from key non-commercial groups from across
    the world to provide advice to .ORG management on policy and other
    issues, as well as to ensure a vehicle for broad participation from
    the non-commercial community. We feel the task of constituting this
    council is best left to the Board of PIR and hence we will not be
    addressing it at this time. It is however one of the most
    important priorities of the new Board.

    The Board of PIR will have 7 Board members (staggered terms) and we
    are looking for a balance of business and financial as well as
    technical namespace expertise. Expertise in supporting the
    non-commercial community or experience in building a broad based
    advisory/input process is also a central requirement. More
    specifically, as this is an initial Board we need to ensure that
    there is adequate expertise, re: setting up a new company,
    negotiating contracts and beginning registry operations. The tight
    timeframe demands experienced individuals and we are looking for
    individuals with proven track records in the areas mentioned above.

    The major activities and priorities of this start-up Board are
    listed below. Please note that there is a lot to be done in a
    short period of time and this is expected to require a fairly
    significant time commitment from Board members over the first
    6 months to a year. Expenses associated with attending the Board
    meeting will be covered.

    1 - Adopting by-laws
    2 - Electing officers
    3 - Appointing the staff of PIR
    4 - Supervising the negotiation and execution of the contract with
    ICANN for management of the .ORG domain (or possibly accepting
    assignment of the rights and obligations of a contract between ISOC
    and ICANN)
    5 - Supervising the negotiation and execution of the contract with
    Afilias for back-end registry services
    6 - Supervising the negotiation and execution of the contracts with
    registrars
    7 - Establishing a .ORG Advisory Council

    In addition to the activities listed above, PIR and its Board must
    also fulfill the commitments made in ISOC's application to ICANN.
    See http://www.isoc.org/dotorg/ for more information as well as to
    see the bid.

    A thorough understanding of registries, registrar and registrant
    needs is critical. PIR is responsible for all policy and general
    management aspects of the .ORG domain, including marketing, public
    relations, defining and positioning new products, etc; and this will
    be done in cooperation with Afilias as our back-end service provider.

    If you or someone you are willing to recommend is interested in
    being considered for the PIR Board we ask you to submit the following
    to pir-board-nomination@isoc.org:

    - A biography - 300 words maximum
    - A rationale of why you or your nominee would be a valuable
    addition to the PIR Board - 300 words maximum
    - If you are nominating someone please procure their agreement
    to be considered prior to your submission.

    The deadline for nominations is the 29th of September.

    Thank you in advance for your support. If you have any questions,
    please do not hesitate to contact me.

    Best regards,

    Lynn St.Amour
    President & CEO
    Internet Society

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .org
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 24 2002, @06:39AM (#9353)
    It is not so much the ISOC for that is of concern, it is the connection with Afilias.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: No, ICANNWatch was just slow to post it
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 24 2002, @07:00AM (#9359)
    Dude, I was surprised it took IW this long to get something posted. It showed up on ICANN's site yesterday afternoon.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .org
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday September 24 2002, @07:37AM (#9362)
    User #2810 Info
    I don't see this as much of a smoking gun. ICANN posted the final report on Monday, see the icann.blog if you don't believe ICANN's claimed date of Monday (it is a Good Thing to not automatically believe what ICANN claims). I also got the above email from ISOC on Monday:

    Subject: PIR Board Call for Nominations
    Date: 23 Sep 02 17:02:30
    Return-Path: ...
    Received: from 192.168.1.132 by mr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: firewall.isoc.org [198.6.250.5]) id QQnhpj24204 for d_d@email.com; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:58:05 GMT

    So I'm not clear which happened first. Regardless, it is entirely possible that ISOC (and perhaps the other bidders) received notification somewhat in advance of it appearing on the ICANN website, I don't think that's a big deal. Besides, the letter states: As you are probably aware ISOC is one of the top contenders in the bid to be the new manager of the .ORG registry. That was about as true after the preliminary report as it is after the final report, except that only 5 bidders will be forwarded to the BoD. From the final report:

    It is staff's view that, given the Board's express instructions that demonstrated ability in operating a TLD registry of significant scale and continuous stability of the .org registry must receive primacy of consideration, only those proposals that are ranked "A" by Gartner and that receive high scores under Criteria 1 (Need to preserve a stable, well-functioning registry) and 9 (Preserving a smooth transition) by Gartner should receive further consideration. These are ISOC, NeuStar, GNR, DotOrg and Register.org. Indeed, Gartner recommends in its covering letter that "ICANN select the next operator of the .org TLD from among" these "five candidates".
    One wonders how many of the other bidders would have bothered giving ICANN $29 thousand, and otherwise spent time, effort, and money on their bids if they knew that they didn't meet this primacy requirement. And the top 5 bidders are all established ICANN players, the first three are ICANN's largest new registries Afilias (.info), NeuStar (.biz), and GNR (.name), the latter two are both Register.com (until recently the second largest ICANN accredited registrar after VeriSign, and still probably number 3). Note that all three of those registries have had no end of problems, and register.com once showed its willingness to file suit against ICANN. So ICANN is replacing a monopoly with a cartel, I suppose that's progress.

    Also note that the Gardner evaluation is taken as definitive, the other groups supposedly involved have fallen by the wayside, the academics weren't even asked, and the NCDNHC group is (typically) ignored. Those are just a few of a regiment of smoking guns in the .org redelegation. I'll point out some others later, time permitting. -g

    [ 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