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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    ICANN's Lynn on alternative roots | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 7 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.
    Multiple submissions of this item!
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Tuesday May 29 2001, @04:46PM (#682)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    Many people, including 300baud and several anonymous, sent us links to and comments on this report. We are grateful to all of you. Notably, hofjes sent us the following:
    Irony: ICANN's Discussion Draft About Unique A-Root and Why It Should Run Same
    ICANN published its “Discussion Draft: A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS”. Its basic premise is (1) there should be only one A-Root; and (2) ICANN should operate that A-Root because it, unlike all alternative DNSes, operates for the public good, and is operated by the Internet community. Do the few people controlling ICANN really believe this?

    I agree that there should be only one authoritative root. I have not seen a viable proposal for multiple A-roots, though I am open to suggestions.

    However, I strongly disagree that ICANN operates the DNS for the public good, and I disagree even more that ICANN is run by the Internet community. To the contrary, ICANN is run by a few self-dealing individuals, and their actions are taken based on their personal beliefs - the ICANN policies are not based on any consensus.

    The ICANN paper criticizes alternative roots as “substitut[ing] insular motives for the community-based processes” and having been created “to gain proprietary advantage” “with little regard for the public interest”. I believe the policies and goals of the Open Root Server Confederation and other alternative roots are much more reflective of the Internet community’s consensus, and of the public interest, than ICANN’s politically motivated policies and direction.

    The ICANN paper is pure irony and hypocrisy. I hope the “discussion” it calls for comes to the same conclusion.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ICANN's Lynn on alternative roots
    by love@cptech.org on Tuesday May 29 2001, @06:08PM (#683)
    User #1652 Info
    If control over the root was only about stability of the net and
    predictability, then it would seem that a single authoritative root
    would be unambiguously the best policy.

    But if those who control the root manage it in a monpolistic manner,
    create huge economic rents to those get who get the scarce TLD
    franchises, and impose all sorts of policies on the entire internet
    community, for example to reduce privacy and to enforce anti free speech
    policies, and who knows what next, then the issue of alternative roots
    becomes more interesting, and yes, also political, because the control
    of the single root has become way too political.

    Jamie Love

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ICANN's Lynn on alternative roots
    by joppenheimer on Wednesday May 30 2001, @08:14AM (#687)
    User #5 Info | http://JudithOppenheimer.com
    > Instead, all we are getting is this draft, with the URL threatening that it'll be presented in Stockholm. What a pity.



    The ICANN Public Forum will begin on Sunday, 3 June 2001. The agenda currently includes the following discussion items and reports:

    16:15 - 17:00 -- Presentation of Discussion Draft on A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ICANN Blog's Comments
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Wednesday May 30 2001, @08:19AM (#688)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    Here, in case you missed them, are Bret Fausett's comments in the ICANN Blog on the ICANN paper (reprinted with permission):
    "Discussion Draft" on Unique Root. Contrary to the idea that policy pronouncements are made "bottom up" from the Supporting Organizations, ICANN Staff posted a draft paper yesterday on "A Unique, Authoritative Root." The paper claims to be a draft statement of policy, but neither the paper itself nor the concerns it purports to address originated with any Supporting Organization. It was not the product of any working group or task force and has not been adopted by the ICANN Board. Although titled a "Discussion Draft," ICANN provided no time on the Public Forum agenda in Stockholm for discussion of the subject and did not create a public forum for posting comments. 

    More importantly, the paper interrupts a DNSO process meant to examine the issue of alternate roots and alternative naming systems. A General Assembly group of the DNSO is now discussing these issues, and the DNSO's Names Council will begin a discussion on the subject with a presentation in Stockholm (Forsyth paper/Mueller paper). The ICANN paper states what the DNSO's conclusion should be.

    This is not the kind of "bottom up" policy development that is supposed to characterize the ICANN process. In a later added preface, ICANN President Stuart Lynn claims the draft as his own work and writes that he felt it necessary to publish it because he found a "lack of completeness" on the "documentation of the policy basis for ICANN's commitment to a unique, authoritative root." Of course the documentation was incomplete -- ICANN has never set an official policy on these issues. The DNSO's Names Council took the first steps in a possible policy process last month when it called for an informational presentation in Stockholm. But the prominent display on the ICANN web site of one draft contribution from ICANN's senior staff is inappropriate and, even in the best light, premature.

    I agree. I expect to see an increasingly propagandistic tone to the ICANN home page as their PR person gets into the swing of the job--and as ICANN starts to feel more cornered. Indeed, last week's self-congratulatory press release on the VeriSign deal -- neither the text of which, nor even the key percentages negotiated at the last minute, has yet to grace ICANN's home page -- is a sign of the new trend.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Some notable things about this draft
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Wednesday May 30 2001, @11:57AM (#693)
    User #2810 Info

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Some notable things about this draft
    by Jon_Weinberg on Thursday May 31 2001, @03:02PM (#707)
    User #16 Info | www.threecats.net
    [Here, until we can fix the bug resulting in the broken link above, is the end of fnord's comment -- jon]

    And 2., in response to the question: What do you wish you had invented? Paul replies: A directory system for the Internet that wouldn't be controlled by the politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats. Amen. -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