"Stability of the Internet"
Date: Wednesday July 03 2002, @04:26PM
Topic: Country-Code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs)

Bret Fausett's blog recently reported a June 25 CENTR statement, responding scathingly to ICANN's newish policy that it will deny any ccTLD requests for name server changes if the ccTLD does not permit IANA to download its zone file routinely via AXFR. CENTR's bottom line:

"The IANA zone transfer requirement has been introduced with no consultation of our members, and to our knowledge, without thorough analysis. . . . It contradicts the principle of bottom-up participation, and has been forced upon our members at a time when there was a compelling requirement to ensure nameserver changes were made expediently. This demand has delayed and confused this process at the risk of decreasing the stability of the Internet - contrary to the very aims of the policy. We can not understand how ICANN, an organisation that needs to demonstrate its legitimacy and improve its working relationship with a sceptical ccTLD community, can perform in the way it has. We object to the fact we even need to debate these policy changes under the threat of loss of DNS stability. The way this matter has been handled is a textbook example of why there is huge concern within the ccTLD community over ICANN's involvement in both policy and administrative matters."

Read the statement here.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
"Stability of the Internet" | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 11 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.
Let ICANN check its own zone first, thank you
by isquat on Wednesday July 03 2002, @08:23PM (#7619)
User #3363 Info | http://i.squ.at/
Let ICANN check its own zone (icann.org) first. It has one nameserver that is not in the ORG zone. Messy.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: consultation and bottom-up policy
by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Thursday July 04 2002, @03:08AM (#7622)
User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
"(It was) introduced with no consultation of our members, and to our knowledge, without thorough analysis. . . . It contradicts the principle of bottom-up participation..."

Heard that one before in connection with ICANN's so-called Evolution (!) and Reform (!!)

ICANN's administration are top-down, claim to be otherwise and don't give a **** if you complain about it!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:
by RFassett on Thursday July 04 2002, @03:39AM (#7624)
User #3226 Info | http://www.enum.info
"Stability of the Internet", without definition, is a trump card ICANN can play at any time. This is an excellent example of this and why cooperative people and entities that have actually been the ones maintaining this stability for years and years won't sign agreements (absent of definition). For example, what is to stop a forced redelegation of a ccTLD down the road for some ambiguous reason of "Internet Stability"? Why would a country or ccTLD operator enter into a contract with this hole in it? If you are them, not a stable decision to make. It seems a pretty basic step for ICANN to define, with boundary, its decision-making jurisdiction with regards to Internet Stability for all to see. After 4+ years it has totally ignored doing so yet use the words over and over to justify its actions of the month. The result is no agreements from the cooperative entities that have actually maintained Internet Stability for the community. What a surprise. They just went through this whole reform process an no where in it did it suggest it should look to define Internet Stability towards its elusive goal of entering into cooperative agreements. It's just totally avoided and the results won't change unless through some means of force.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Deja vu all over again
by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Thursday July 04 2002, @04:53AM (#7627)
User #2810 Info
ICANNWatch already covered the similar draft statement.

This shows the kind of hardball we can expect from ICANN 2. Do what we want or we'll crash the net. -g

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Press coverage
by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday July 08 2002, @12:51AM (#7690)
User #2810 Info
Coverage from the BBC. -g
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.




  • This article comes from ICANNWatch
    http://www.icannwatch.org/

    The URL for this story is:
    http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/03/202623