Slashdot Mirror
ICANN CEO Proposes Radical Changes
Froomkin writes: "ICANN CEO Stuart Lynn today released a plan for a "strong" ICANN that would have 5 of 15 Board members selected directly by governments and the rest by registrars, registries, plus a few Board-squatter-like ringers chosen by the ICANN Board or staff. The main justifications offered for this shift are that in order to be "strong" ICANN needs more money, more support, and less "process". Of course, promises Lynn, ICANN's "core values of openness and broad participation" should be "preserved". (Don't laugh. It's not funny.) "Meaningful participation" will be achieved by cutting out any direct representation for end-users. Oh yes, ICANN wants a much bigger budget, and to be independent of the US Dept. of Commerce, and to get direct control of the root server operators too, all so as to ensure that ICANN has unimpeded ability to execute its (undefined, growing) "mission". ICANN was supposed to save the Internet from governments; since major interest groups such as the ccTLDs and RIRs won't do what ICANN wants, and won't pay it, ICANN now turns to governments to save it from the Internet. See the Press Release here, and then look at entire plan, then visit ICANNWatch.org for updates and commentary." Yep. The proposal would eliminate any pretense of At-Large involvement in running ICANN - it would be solely a governmental and corporate body.
If you look at the history of new communication methods they always become the domain, pun intended, of governments and businesses.
a sm at/class1/tvhist.htm
m at/class1/tvhist.htm
Telegraph and Radio: http://www.ipass.net/~whitetho/part1.htm
Television:
http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/schools/rta/brd038/cl
I am surprised that the internet has lasted this long in the public after the government ceded control to a panel.
It all comes down to funding in the end. In 1999 they started making noises: http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/schools/rta/brd038/clas
If we think that the domain situation concerning freedom of speech is murky now, wait until countries such as China, Iran, etc. get onto the board.
OpenNic sounds like a reasonably democratic choice. They allow voting on new TLDs. If there is any criticism of them, I'd like to hear it right here. Remember, if we can't vote, we can still vote with our feet.
The least you could have done is check your links.
I personally like OpenNIC, but there are even more like Pacific Root and commercial ones like New.Net
Linux: Because a PC is a terrible thing to waste.
James Brents
>Why? Because we paid for it and own it.
The US "owns" the *whole* internet, and paid for it? Wow.. am I ignorant. I guess it makes sense though, since Al Gore 'invented' it.
As far as I know, ARPAnet and the TCP/IP protocol stack were invented by scientists working in America (but you might want to go back and check all their nationalities... you might find a few suprises!). By extension the early internet was mainly in the US. But hey, have you ever heard of JANet (Joint Academic Network)? You know the early packet-switching network that the BRITISH had?
Yup, true story. 'Back in the day', there was a single link between what you so quaintly refer to as 'the whole internet' (e.g. the US network that grew out of ARPAnet) and JANet. You had to telnet to a host out on the US east cost (name escapes me at the moment, it was a long time ago) and then enter the JANet address you wanted.
I seem to remember that JANet address were 'backwards' too (e.g. org.slashdot.www )
As far as I know, JAnet was designed and built pretty much autonomously by the British. I don't ever recall hearing about American's desigining it, or paying for it. In fact, I'm pretty sure it was based on X.25 too.
Anyway, the point is that several other countries had their own packet switched networks that eventually got hooked together to create the 'internet'. As the lowest common denominator its true that TCP/IP become the de facto standard, and yes this is an American invention.
But the honest truth is that the U.S. "paid for and own" the internet about as much as Al Gore invented pants.
Stuart Lynn, ICANN CEO (Primus: super mack-daddy of all ICANN biznezz?), whoever the hell he thinks he is, is obviously crying out for help because he says ICANN can't make DNS work in the future. I read his stupid whining polemic, and it isn't really worth more than a brief scan. He wants some real money and guns so he can pay lawyers and boss the root DNS server operators around. De facto, he says they can do whatever they want without accountability to the ICANN or anyone else. He wants to make policy decisions to govern the technical operation (and design) of current and future DNS services.
ICANN is going down, because it doesn't DO anything for anyone involved. He is like the country bumpkin character from Kafka's short story: Before the Law. BIND comes with a list of compiled-in root server IP addresses. You can query all of those for a complete and curent list of root servers. This is how your DNS server knows who to ask when it doesn't know the IP address you're trying to get. Your DNS server (at the whim of your ISP) could possibly start using root servers that are not on that list. The websites you thought you knew (or maybe just their typos) would not come up; maybe you would see some nasty pr0nz (from people who paid marketing $$ to your ISP) instead. The nasty pr0n fake root operators (NPFROs) can't guarantee the pr0n marketdroids that their sites will get hits because you might configure your computer to use an independent (or your own) DNS server that the ISP doesn't control. Therefore the ISP can't get marketing kickbacks for screwing with your DNS. Likewise, none of your ISP's upstream DNS providers can do it, nor any of the root DNS operators. People could always just stop hitting their DNS.
What Mr. Stuart Lynn wants is a legal binding document that says "one ring to bind them all" so his ICANN can force the root DNS operators to become like his own personal NPFROs, but now bona fide by the contract (called a Memorandum Of Understanding or MOU) that opens the root server operator up to civil lawsuits and criminal liability. He wants to say "You must agree on penalty of law to publish the list of root DNS servers I tell you to" to make the root DNS operators kow tow to the corporate and lobbying interests that pay.
Right now, nobody has any reason to pay him for anything. People who don't understand how the political consensus exists and flows in DNS de facto tried to make ICANN do it artificially. Everyone who can, right now should go learn how to run a DNS server (not trivial) and imagine you and all your buddies and everyone who used to be on Napster are all going to run your own root servers. Think yourself through all the possibilities, and act on the best one(s) you can come up with. Stuart Lynn is not going to get his money, because we can all change our DNS settings and no amount of money or lawyers can change that. Be prepared if some root servers start humming a different tune, you might decide you want to hear something else.
--- Nothing clever here: move along now...
All it takes for the typical end-user to begin using the open root is a few minutes' engaged in some independent action. I can see a couple hundred TLD's -- ICANNot!
Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.
It's difficult to imagine why you think we're a scam Bill, when it's the ICANN franchiees that were dragged into court for running an illegal lottery after ICANN staff ("lawyers") had spent the losing applicants money to review the winners proposals and bless them.
:-)
Perhaps you have a bad taste in your mouth from some of the 1996/7 bad craziness that went on. That didn't do anybody any good, no argument there, but those people have, uh, "retired" mercifully. And hey, if it's good enough for an ICANN baord member to use the ORSC root, it's good enough for you
If you don't want to be scammed, don't spend any money. You can still have an non-ICANN domain name , honest.
Need Mercedes parts ?