Slashdot Mirror

Lawyer and ICANN blogger Bret Fausett is providing a steady stream of podcasts from Vancouver, including this one, which reviews the meeting in which the "non-decision" was announced. Apparently the staff at ICM Registry (the folks slated to run the .xxx domain) were completely blindedsided by Vint Cerf's announcement that .xxx had been tabled - which came right before ICM was to make a presentation on it.

Their CEO is a sociopathic liar, at least in terms of behavior norms for responsible Internet protocol maintainers.

http://blog.lextext.com/blog/_archives/2003/10/20/ 4773.html

Rather than focus on what constitutes an "open relay," which is really a technical issue rather than a policy issue, I'd rather see more thought given to the damage caused by blackhole lists. Are we really interested in championing their use? Spam today, something else "offensive" tomorrow? How different is this than when Chinese ISPs decide to block Google? As vile as spam is, I don't think this is the right tool.

My response to the original letters sent in by New Architect readers:

When it comes to mail administration, it appears I was several years behind the curve. Since my mail server software, circa 1996, had been purring along quietly without problems since it was new, I had never upgraded it to a version capable of a higher degree of authentication. I'm also old enough to remember when an "open relay" was a relay intentionally left open for anyone to use, not one merely susceptible to misuse. Thanks to all of the readers who wrote to bring me into the new millennium. Both my software and my definition are now upgraded.

At the same time, I labeled the blackhole list operators "vigilantes" for good reason. It was always my understanding that if you lie about your identity to gain access to something that would be closed to you if you told the truth, you've done something wrong. That's true whether you intend to send spam or prevent it. As vile as spam is, the ends don't justify the means. Regardless of whether my mail server used to be "open" or not, I stand by the legal analysis that placed fault on the blackhole operators who forged their identity.

-- Bret
www.lextext.com

I'm generally reasonably available by e-mail to talk about this stuff. (karl@cavebear.com)

If you want some of the raw materials a good place to start is Ellen Rony's archives at http://www.domainhandbook.com Also take a look at Bret Fausett's blog - http://www.lextext.com/icann/index.html

There are Web sites devoted to following the criminal antics of the ICANN thievery, such as ICANN Blog and ICANN Watch.

The Gardener

The whois data can't be trusted to be accurate.
Even Congress is investigating the problem.

Also keep an eye on the ICANN Blog.

See the left hand navigation on the blog page. He updates it very regularly, like a good blog should. For example, here is the archive page for 12/00.

While we are on the topic of ICANN...

Here is the ICANN weblog.

...it is about 1 year old.