DoC to Extend ICANN's Control of IANA

Luminous Coward writes "I first saw this on The Register. Kevin Murphy of Computerwire reports: The US Department of Commerce last week quietly published a document detailing its decision to "sole-source" the contract for the so-called IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) function to ICANN, as opposed to opening the contract for competitive bidding. ICANNWatch explains why this is a bad idea. They also report that the ccTLDs and the Internet Multicasting Service have expressed interest in running IANA."

Comments

Well...

[cK-Gunslinger]

IANAL, but if ICANN takes control of IANA, then the ccTLDs just SOL and the IMS are FUBAR'd, IMHO.

Power Grab

[sstamps]

IANA and the RIRs are pretty much the last vestiges of the "independent Internet" authorities as we know them. Once ICANN gets their grubby hands on IANA, I think the final nail is in the coffin of the "free (as in speech) Internet".

What part of this does anyone NOT see as hideously WRONG?! Every day, another domino falls, and I feel more and more like a slave to the Pharoahs of Washington D.C. Is there nothing left for us to do except just sit the hell down and accept our yoke of submission like a good little peon?

What banner do we have that the vast majority of us can rally under to stop this stupidity? I mean, we all pay lip service to "supporting the cause", but action is pretty thin right now. I'm one to talk, too. :(

Re:Good idea... bordering on brilliant

[onta]

The problem that makes the UN impotent is not the fact that many countries are ruled by dictators (the idea behind the UN is to be a forum for *all* countries, not just democracies).

One of the biggest problems is the US's behaviour. For years the US refused to pay its quota, and has only paid its debt with the UN when they wanted something from it.

US's respect for UN resolutions is not very good either, and the UN does not have the capability of enforcing the resolutions, that's just impossible. Just two examples here:

• There was a UN resolution telling Israel to move out of the occupied territories. Israel has obviously not moved out, and while many countries have said it should, the US just lets Israel do whatever they want.
• Last november the UN said Iraq should disarm and sent inspectors, now the US wants a resolution that will allow them to attack Iraq, there's nothing wrong with asking for a resolution, except that Bush said he would only follow the resolution if it said what he wanted.

Now, how could the UN be useful if the single most powerful and influent nation in the world does not want to know anything about it, except if it is for its own benefit??

Earth to DoC

[SubtleNuance]

That is very interesting news considering This article at The Register . The article talks about how Eurpoean top-level registries take over the technical task of running the Internet if ICANN cannot be relied upon to do a proper job -- because ICANN cannot seperate their Political machinations from the technical aspects of the DNS.

A good example would be ICANN's desire to create a artifical scarcity of TLDs to maintain 'value in the namespace'...

Re:Maybe the best solution

[Mr. Slippery]

Perhaps the running of the internet should become a United Nations function?

I was just thinking that perhaps it should be handed over to the ITU. If they can get the world's phone systems talking to one another, the Internet should be a piece of cake in comparison. (You ever look at telephony protocols? You don't want to. Trust me.)