FC: ICANN launches attack, condemns alternate roots for domain names

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

ICANN's "discussion draft" on the topic, released this week:
http://www.icann.org/stockholm/unique-root-draft.htm

Summary: ICANN is touting the principle of "a unique, authoritative root" 
for the domain name system, saying it's "a rerequisite to Internet 
stability." ICANN says: "It is essential that operations involving 
'alternative' DNS roots be conducted in a controlled manner, so that they 
do not adversely affect those who have not consented to participate in 
them." But who decides what's a "controlled manner" or not?

Yesterday I sent out another draft discussion paper on alternate roots 
(http://www.politechbot.com/p-02077.html). One respondent said -- in 
response to my offer of "If you want to write a non-antagonistic response 
I'd be happy to send it out" -- the following:

> I am not able to do so. The short version would be "all he is proposing is 
> replacing ICANN with a different group". The longer version would document 
> the history of the lack of agreement of the rogue^H^H^H^H^Halternate 
> roots, the fact that first-come-first-served failed the early alternative 
> roots (.biz and .xxx are great examples), and the fact that some TLD names 
> are worth so many of orders of magnitude more than others (.biz and .xxx 
> are great examples) that the new group would have the same level of 
> financial political ugliness that ICANN has, but probably distributed 
> differently. Or, to put it shortly, "Because of money and politics, ICANN 
> sucks and so will whatever you create; get over it".

-Declan

***********

Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:30:03 -0400
From: William Allen Simpson <wsimpson () greendragon com>
To: declan () well com
Subject: Re: FC: Alternate roots for domain names explained in IETF draft
References: <20010529103202.A18068 () cluebot com>

Pardon me, but there are a number of fallacious premises in this document, 
well beyond the border into disingenousness.

In particular: "The origin of these alternative roots can be found in
the rough consensus and running code behind Draft Postel[4] (which was
subverted by the gTLD-MOU...)."

 - the rough consensus and running code was that only IANA approved and
   delegated iTLDs.  See Postel[4] page 3, "delegated ... by the
   authority of the IANA"; ibid page 6 "The IANA continues to supervise
   and control the creation and management aspects of the iTLDs", etc.

 - is it possible for a principle author and signer of the gTLD-MOU to
   "subvert" her/his own writings?  It is apparent to all those of us
   who actually discussed this issue with Jon Postel that he was not
   in favor of "virtual" creation of "alternative" roots.  Adamantly
   opposed, was my personal impression....

 - The process specified was not followed by these "virtual" roots,
   especially [ibid] page 6:

   5.10. Registries pay for charters, and the fees collected are kept in
      a fund managed by the ISOC and used for the iTLD process (such as
      for insurance against an iTLD registry withdrawal or collapse),
      and possibly to support an evolved future funding model for the
      IANA.

   Which ones paid?  Funny how these "alternatives" always seem to be
   more interesting in gathering moneys for themselves than funding
   community infrastructure.

Anyone can send a draft to the IETF.  It is an open process.  That
doesn't mean it will become adopted as a standard.

Heck, even Postel wrote a draft suggesting that registries should be
awarded iTLDs by annual lottery, to avoid any hint of capture or
"ownership" of the underlying service.  Note that one doesn't seem
to be cited by Higgs....

In any case, this draft is clearly against the existing consensus.
More like an April fools draft.

William Allen Simpson

************




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------