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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    TLD Registration Enforcement: A Call for Automation | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 30 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.
    .COM / .NET / .ORG
    by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Friday September 27 2002, @06:55AM (#9426)
    User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
    When .COM, .NET, and .ORG started, they could be described as "open and chartered"; while registrations were open to the public (not tightly controlled like .GOV and .MIL), there were intended purposes documented in RFC 1591 that the registry/registrar was expected to enforce -- in the early days, many attempted registrations got rejected due to their applicant not being the proper sort of entity (I can recall an attempt on my own part to register a .NET domain on the behalf of a client that was turned down because they weren't a network infrastructure provider). But then Network Solutions (the monopoly registrar and registry at the time) dropped the ball and stopped even trying to enforce these rules, and the free-for-all began.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Working
    by edelman@law.harvard. on Friday September 27 2002, @07:37AM (#9429)
    User #884 Info | http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/edelman.html
    I think the circleid.com server had some problems last night, but it's (long since) back up.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    OK, then let's remove the "ridiculuous" rules
    by edelman@law.harvard. on Friday September 27 2002, @07:43AM (#9431)
    User #884 Info | http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/edelman.html
    Fair enough. If that's the community consensus, though, isn't the proper procedure for the registration restrictions (that prohibit reselling) to be explicitly rescinded by community consensus.

    To me, it seem odd simply to ignore (flout and fail to enforce) a rule that at least some people say isn't appropriate. If the rule is in fact to be removed, then let's go ahead and remove it. But so long as it's on the books, I'm not sure it's right or sensible just to pretend it's not in effect.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    TLDs with "large-scale registrations"
    by BenEdelman on Friday September 27 2002, @02:25PM (#9441)
    User #3219 Info | http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/edelman
    You're right to point out that I failed to consider a number of restricted TLDs -- .COOP along with .MUSEUM, .AERO, .EDU, .MIL, .GOV, etc.

    My intention was to focus on a problem that I understand to be asociated primarily with TLDs that intend to receive large numbers of registrations from, roughly, many hundreds of thousands of registrants (or more). My sense is that .COOP et al don't market themselves in a way that could lead to this kind of registration counts, or to the kind of nonconforming registration problems the article describes. There's no doubt that a highly restricted TLD can avoid non-conforming registrations -- I bet every .MIL is what the TLD suggests! -- but my goal in the piece was to get at a problem that isn't seen in this genre of TLDs, and (so far as I know) isn't seen with .COOP.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: TLD Registration Enforcement: A Call for Autom
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday September 30 2002, @08:27AM (#9456)
    User #2810 Info
    Anon writes:
    quit worrying about a few legitimate registrants trying to sell their .biz names.
    If they're trying to sell their .biz names they're not legitimate registrants. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Why I haven't written much about .INFO to date
    by BenEdelman on Tuesday October 01 2002, @09:59AM (#9480)
    User #3219 Info | http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/edelman
    As I considered (earlier this summer) which TLDs to focus on for various research projects, I was struck by the attention .INFO was already getting -- from multiple researchers, as described in this thread and in others. It's for that reason that I decided to focus my work elsewhere, by and large; I figure I can be more helpful and find more results that are as yet unknown if I work where others aren't.

    So, no, I wouldn't say that the reason for my recent focus is not because it's "safer than ... go[ing] after the real abusers" (and I don't know that I'd immediately agree with your sense of which problems are most serious).
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • 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