Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    What a day... | 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
    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: What a day...
    by alexander on Sunday October 28 2001, @03:55AM (#3203)
    User #22 Info | http://www.icannchannel.de
    "Moral putrescence", "increasingly dictatorial", "zombie process", "neo-totalitarian cultural politics", "'emergency' usurpation by the structural equivalent of a junta", "authoritarian" -- and then criticizing others for being "pathetically shrill"? Focussing on the issues might be a less counterproductive way of criticism.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: What a day...
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Sunday October 28 2001, @06:29AM (#3211)
    User #2810 Info
    I think this article pointing out the conjunction of two further usurpations of the ICANN machinery is focusing on the issues. We have ex-staffer Mike Roberts and non-staffer Joe Sims calling the shots, it has always been that way, and it is getting worse. What power should either of these two individuals have? They are accountable to no-one.

    When necessary their worldview is passed on to the always willing ICANN staff for action. Should there be a BoD motion required they can go to the ExComm. To make ICANN appear open and transparent they can have full BoD meetings at which it is woefully apparent much of the BoD is unprepared, if not outright clueless. The BoD motions almost always go the way that Roberts and Sims want, and are almost always passed with little or no discussion or dissent. Isn't this rather surprising given the ICANN BoD and SO structure was ostensibly created to bring together dissimilar and even competing interests? The BoD is just a rubber stamp, a titular figurehead to divert attention away from the backroom boys. It seems to be obvious to all but the willfully blind that there is a major disconnect of what constitutes consensus.

    Most all of these upper level folks couldn't write (or read and understand) a line of code to save themselves, yet we are supposed to believe that internet security needs to be vested in their hands, with one side effect being that any built-in brakes on the non-elected and non-appointed will be completely broken.

    There are two main scenarios here. The first one is that the threats to internet security are much overblown, either because terrorists see more of a payoff in real world actions than in impeding our ability to reach dognoses.com, and/or because that part of the internet infrastructure that is within ICANN's purview have withstood prior attacks, including by some who are much more technically clued about how to do it than the terrorists appear to be. There are reports of terrorists taking flying lessons, not BIND 101. What's more, as terrorists use the internet to pass coded messages, why take it down? So they'd have to use less secure and more traceable means of communicating? That doesn't make any sense.

    On the other hand we have a scenario where the dangers of attacks on the internet infrastructure are real. If that is the case then do we want this bunch, who can't do a proof of concept rollout of a few new TLDs without repeated (and continuing) pratfalls running the show? There are already government departments involved with internet security, to the point they are stepping on each other's toes. We also have some in the private security industry saying they're the ones who should be counted on. ICANN, no matter how optimistically one views them, can't be anything but a detriment to this mix. What is most surprising is that they would even want the responsibility. If someone does launch a successful cyberattack surely there will be some serious, even shrill, questions raised about how and why the ICANN backroom single point of failure has been mapped as authoritative over the previously decentralized internet, and it won't just be ICANNWatchers they'd have to answer to. -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