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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we're in) | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 151 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: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @10:01AM (#1211)
    I think it makes perfect sense. ICANN seems to be in charge and on the happy side of government rubber stamping.

    I think IOD is finally starting to show some brains.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @10:55AM (#1217)
    Bravo IOD! The only reason ICANN could reject you now would be just for spite!

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @11:26AM (#1220)
    I've been able to resolve IOD's .web for quite some time (I use the ORSC roots.)

    Will IOD be asking ORSC and other root's to remove the delegation record for IOD's .web?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Stuart Lynn: On a Witch Hunt, Out For a Pound
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @11:55AM (#1222)
    You know, it occurs to me that Stuart Lynn’s anti-IOD bias couldn’t get any clearer, and as far as I am concerned, that cripples his credibility and the credibility of a very clumsy, very expensive and very scrutinized process. His policy paper regarding an authoritative root reads more like an impassioned diatribe against not only New.net, but IOD as well, by implication.

    However, IOD and New.net belong to a different species. In fact, IOD and ARNI (original .biz) are different species, even though they come from the same era.

    New.net appeared on the scene, operating OUTSIDE of the system employed by ICANN. IOD, on the other hand, has been operating within the system since before ICANN itself was created. IOD is hardly a registry-squatter as Lynn, Hans Kraaijenbrink and Frank Fitzsimmons would have you believe. The sad thing is, they have departed from DNS history in order to vilify IOD.

    IOD does not, and has never, sanctioned an alternate root. They inhabit one, however, because of a process initiated by IANA, in a root that was established as a test-bed so that database proficiency and stability could be demonstrated. Subsequently, the process was put on hold and ICANN directors the likes mentioned above, seem to think that the industry will forget history.

    Think about Stuart Lynn’s position piece recently published. If implicit in it is a warning to IOD that it will never see the insides of the Main Root, we have more clear evidence that bias exists. Lynn seems to be making a declaration and a judgment even before the second application has been submitted—and I’m sorry, but a fair and open process has no place for such a sensibility. That’s like a judge and jury determining their decision in advance of a trial.

    One doesn’t have to be a supporter of IOD to understand that such practice is egregious and specious.

    It is immoral, it is unprofessional, it is nothing short of a witch hunt. History has seen it before and we see it moving into place once again with a world of witnesses.

    It is politicking, it is grandstanding, it is begrudging, it is spiting – and it is moving ICANN further from its technical duties into some ambiguous, pseudo-moralistic realm. Yet ICANN is far from moral.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @03:11PM (#1226)

    This is simple, IOD saw all the FREE advertising that
    New.Net gets by being Stuart Lynn's target.

    IOD now wants to be the target, it builds traffic
    to their site.

    IOD was slipping from the mindshare position,
    Tucows announced they were going to apply
    for .WEB. IOD wants to get back in Stuart Lynn's
    face.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @03:59PM (#1232)

    Apparently, IOD is too cheap to PAY to be included
    in the root servers. The European root servers are
    going to be expensive. Check the price of a meal
    in Paris or Geneva. Nothing moves in Europe without
    a lot of grease.

    IOD now wants to get cozy with ICANN, to avoid
    paying. IOD thinks their $50,000 is still in play.

    IOD is forgetting that ICANN would require tens
    of millions of dollars in backing.

    In the end, IOD will likely lose .WEB to one of
    the well-financed ICANN Registrars, who are now
    trying to assemble a TLD package to compete
    with New.Net.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @04:13PM (#1233)

    Meanwhile, Stuart Lynn is vacationing in Asia,
    on one of those highly publicized, open and
    transparent trips.

    council] Re: Nominations for Board TLD planning group
    To: "Philip Sheppard"
    Subject: [council] Re: Nominations for Board TLD planning group
    From: "M. Stuart Lynn"
    Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:32:33 -0700
    Cc: "NC (list)"
    In-Reply-To:
    References:
    Sender: owner-council@dnso.org

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Re: Nominations for Board TLD planning group
    Dear Phillip:


    Many thanks to the NC for the excellent nominations. It will be a hard selection for me to make since any of these individuals would of course make an excellent contribution.


    I am travelling in Asia right now, but I hope to be able to select the committee as soon as I return.


    With thanks
    Stuart
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @04:39PM (#1236)

    IOD sees the writing on the wall, they can not
    survive with one TLD.

    Why would anyone RENEW a .WEB registration,
    when over 50,000,000 people have access to
    New.Net names ?

    IOD's only chance is for ICANN to sweep the floor
    and toss as many TLDs into the legacy roots as
    they can. Unfortunately, the market is soft. Vint
    Cerf said (in public) at the last ICANN meeting that
    it was not clear that the market can absorb many
    new TLDs. ICANN now has to do market analysis,
    and it will conclude from the poor .BIZ and .INFO
    results, that NO new TLDs are needed.

    .COM will be king
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @05:18PM (#1239)

    Here are some more facts:

    .INFO is proving to be a non-desirable TLD

    The CEO of .INFO quit before launching the TLD

    The ICANN Board forced .INFO into the market

    .WEB should be marketed by ALL the ICANN Registrars

    ICANN needs to allow .INFO to change to .WEB

    People should not be denied .WEB names because
    of IOD's high prices and low visibility

    New.Net servers do not even reference .WEB,
    what does that tell one about the success of .WEB ?

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @07:04PM (#1249)

    ICANN should REGULATE .WEB names to be $5 per year

    .WEB should be used instead of .INFO
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @07:09PM (#1251)

    IOD can not meet these performance specifications

    http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/biz/registry-agmt-appd-11may01.htm
    Performance Specifications

    1. Introduction. The attached Performance Specification Matrix ("Matrix") provides a list of performance specifications as they apply to the three Core Services provided by the Registry - SRS, Nameserver, and Whois services.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @07:17PM (#1252)

    Does IOD have $34,000,000 ?

    http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/biz/registry-agmt-appw-25apr01.htm
    4. Funding Commitment

    Registry Operator shall have available from either internal or external sources a minimum of US $34,000,000 in funding solely for Registry Operator's activities in establishing and operating the Registry TLD through the date that is one year following the Commencement-of-Service Date.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @08:02PM (#1256)

    Does the IOD .WEB have any affiliate marketing programs ?

    Does the IOD .WEB have any Registrars ?

    Why are IOD .WEB names so expensive ?

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @08:11PM (#1258)

    Does IOD have $15,000,000 ?

    http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/biz/registry-agmt-appw-25apr01.htm

    5. Marketing Commitment

    Registry Operator shall have available from either internal or external sources a minimum of US $15,000,000 for marketing Registry Services in the Registry TLD. Registry Operator shall use reasonable commercial efforts to effectively market .biz Registry Services during the Term of the Agreement.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @05:06AM (#1279)

    .WEB does not need to partner with New.Net

    .WEB needs to partner with AOL, @Home, Earthlink, Juno, Prodigy, and and who else matters ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @05:10AM (#1280)

    NeuCows already announced they are taking .WEB

    .WEB should be for everybody
    Maybe the ISOC should take it ?
    Vint says the Internet is for everybody

    Vint is holding .WEB for his retirement
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @05:17AM (#1282)

    One thing for sure, ICANN owns .WEB

    IOD gave .WEB to ICANN

    ICANN can sit on it as long as they want

    .WWW may be a better choice
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD's history from IANA to today
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @05:29AM (#1285)
    TIMELINE

    * IANA establishes an application process.

    * IOD applies, is told to turn on its registry within the alternate root so as to demonstrate viability.

    * IOD does so.

    * IOD waits.

    * IOD waits.

    * IOD waits.

    * ICANN replaces IANA, assuming the contracts and responsibilities established by IANA.

    * ICANN talks about new gTLDs. And talks, and talks.

    * IOD continues operations, proving viability, ironing out any wrinkles that might exist, gaining years of experience.

    * ICANN initiates an application process.

    * IOD applies, pays $50,000, even though it previously applied to IANA.

    * Some of the ICANN directors, as well as the CEO, accuse IOD of setting up operations in advance of the application process.

    * A company called New.net come into existence, operating outside of ICANN's system. ICANN people make statements that implicitly sweep New.net and IOD in the same category--like trying to shove a square peg in a round hole.

    Does ICANN really believe they can rewrite recorded history with an accusation?


    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @05:35AM (#1288)

    The solution is to accelerate the schedule for .BIZ

    .BIZ can be viewed like .WEB

    IOD can move all the .WEB customers to .BIZ

    Then .WEB can be started from scratch
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @06:22AM (#1295)

    The New ICANN Movie shows how the ICANN Board is going to get .WEB away from IOD

    Take notes
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @06:38AM (#1296)

    .WEB and IOD are NOT supported by Domain.Sport

    http://www.Domain.Sport

    or http://www.Domain.Sport.New.Net

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @06:46AM (#1298)
    http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2780130,00.html

    eWeek: I'm sure you're aware of the growing amount of alternative domain names being tried—companies like New.net, with .shop, and many others. How much of a threat are these, first of all to ICANN's authority, and also to the growth of the Web?

    Lynn: Well, we don't think it's a threat to ICANN's authority at all. ICANN's authority is well-rooted in the community and the way we're established. We're here for the public interest—to support the public interest. What we do, including how we state the introduction of new TLDs, always has that public interest in mind and community in mind. We can't prevent anyone else from engaging in alternative roots for their own private gain. But we should understand that it is not something that is directed to the public interest.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Technical difficulties?
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Friday July 13 2001, @03:47PM (#1316)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    We appear to be having some technical difficulties with our software. Several people have reported that their comments are being entered as "anonymous" even when they are logged into the site. If this has happened to you and
    • you have checked to make sure you are logged in to the site;
    • you are certain you are not blocking cookies;
    • you have not reported it to us previously,
    please drop a note to the webmaster stating your operating system, your browser name and version, and anything else you think we should know about the incident. It is currently unclear what we can do about this, short of changing to a newer version of the PHP-Nuke software...which is not something we will do lightly as so much can go wrong.

    -Michael Froomkin (if this message is anonymous, I've reproduced the problem...)

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @03:29AM (#1325)

    Registries charge $5 per year

    Why does IOD charge so much ?

    Is IOD a Registry or Registrar ?

    Should ICANN find IOD a company to be the $5 Registry ?

    Could NeuCows be the $5 .WEB Registry ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @08:08AM (#1331)

    Since IOD has now stated that they are NOT part
    of any alternate roots, and they were clearly
    rejected by the ICANN Board, one has to conclude
    that the .WEB TLD does not exist any longer,
    unless IOD is claiming that they exist without the
    support of ANY root zone publisher.

    Is IOD claiming they exist without ANY root zone
    publisher support ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @08:13AM (#1332)

    Magazines often are required to publish the number
    of readers they have to satisfy advertisers.

    How many new users can access .WEB names ?

    If .WEB names are $35 and 35 people can access
    the names, then that is $1 per person.

    If New.Net names are $25 and 55,000,000 million
    people can access the names, then that is
    .0000006 per person.

    What are the true facts ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    How can .WEB exist ? without at least ONE root
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @08:58AM (#1334)
    https://www.webtld.com/singleroot.asp

    "IOD neither operates nor supports an alternative root system.

    We are aware that operators of alternative roots include IOD's .Web registry in their root server system - this inclusion is expected given the large number of .Web customers. However, IOD has no agreements, tacit or otherwise, about the inclusion of its .Web registry in any root server system. IOD's sole mission has been - and remains - to operate the .Web registry within the single, authoritative public root for the Internet Domain Name System (DNS)."

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @09:57AM (#1342)

    IOD seems to be trying to avoid a serious problem.
    IOD has not lived up to the expectations of the
    .WEB customers who paid money to IOD to be
    their advocates.

    IOD was rejected by ICANN.

    IOD has apparently not negotiated with ISPs to
    be included, as New.Net has done.

    Instead, IOD has pocketed a lot of money, with
    no follow through on behalf of the .WEB owners
    who placed their trust and confidence in IOD.

    Now, IOD seems to want to deflect all of the
    attention to ICANN.

    If ICANN looks closely, they may see that IOD
    has not helped the .WEB community. IOD has
    helped itself.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @04:03PM (#1355)

    ICANN will require ALL of the current .WEB customers to drop any claims to their names.

    ICANN will then spend years letting the trademark people move to the head of the line.

    Why does IOD think a partnership with ICANN is good for .WEB owners ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @05:43PM (#1367)

    .WEB is just one of the many TLDs killed by the ICANN process.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @06:02PM (#1368)

    If IOD truely means what they say, they should turn the power off on all of the .WEB nameservers.

    Then, they can walk into an ICANN meeting and claim to NOT be working outside of ICANN.

    ICANN wants virgin TLDs
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Saturday July 14 2001, @06:06PM (#1369)

    People are correct. IOD is nothing like New.Net.

    New.Net is an equal to ICANN

    New.Net should deal directly with the U.S. Department of Commerce

    IOD needs ICANN to do their negotiating with the DOC and ICANN has decided to first destroy .WEB and then rebuild it the way ICANN wants.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    IOD's sole mission - .WEB registry
    by Anonymous on Sunday July 15 2001, @03:29AM (#1383)
    https://www.webtld.com/singleroot.asp
    "IOD's sole mission has been - and remains - to operate the .Web registry"


    Registries charge $5 or less per year

    Registries have Registrars

    Registries have wide-spread support from the community
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Does IOD support EPP ?
    by Anonymous on Sunday July 15 2001, @05:42AM (#1385)

    Does IOD support EPP ?
    or is IOD too busy not partnering with anyone ?

    http://sourceforge.net/projects/epp-rtk/

    This is the EPP (Extensible Provisioning Protocol) Registry/Registrar Toolkit. It is used by domain name registrars that wish to communicate with EPP domain name registries (eg. .info, .name, .pro, .biz).

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Say Bye Bye to fixed TLDs
    by Anonymous on Sunday July 15 2001, @07:18AM (#1393)
    Re: Say Bye Bye to fixed TLDs
    « Reply #5 on: July 1st, 2001, 1:35pm »

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I think the diversity in TLDs is great, truly reflects human nature. NameSlinger has provided a way to give customers truly a name they want.....in a responsible manner! They have zero'd in on the collider problem in true visionary style!

    And to those who say TLDs should be limited.....Why don't they do this with phone numbers or 1-800 numbers....Is it because of a shortage? or because people natuarally want choice!!! Believe it or not, its because people want choice!!! There are plenty of dot coms left, but I for one think a dot com or even a dot shop is limiting in every sense of the word.

    All I can say, is it will be great, when the rest of the population finally gets it! As usual they will be a day late, and a dollar short!!

    to Marketers: Jump on board! See what all the "buzz" is about....It's definitely not about the fact you are limited!!! On NameSlinger™ you are only limited by how far you can stretch your advertising mind!

    Gregory W. Krajewski
    « Last Edit: July 1st, 2001, 1:49pm by izopod »

    [ 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