Slashdot Mirror
US Agency Lines Up Broad Support For ICANN Transition (pcworld.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from PCWorld: A U.S. agency has lined up broad support for its plan to end the government's oversight of the Internet's domain name system, despite opposition from some Republicans in Congress. The U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on Thursday released statements of support for a plan to end its oversight of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Among supporters of a plan, developed by the ICANN community, to transition ICANN's domain name coordination functions to a multistakeholder governance model are Amazon.com, Google, Cisco Systems, Microsoft, Facebook, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Computer and Communications Industry Association. NTIA on Thursday announced it had reviewed the community proposal and found it meets the agency's criteria for allowing the ICANN privatization plan to move forward. The community plan maintains the openness of the Internet and maintains the security and stability of the DNS, said NTIA Administrator Lawrence Strickling. It does not replace NTIA's oversight with another government organization, he said, although that's been a fear of some critics of the NTIA plan. On Wednesday, Ted Cruz proposed a bill, the Protecting Internet Freedom Act, that would prohibit the U.S. government from relinquishing its role with respect to overseeing the web's domain name system (DNS), unless explicitly authorized by Congress.
Having ICANN't run itself? That's a swell plan. Having it "governed" by a bunch of big companies? Yay, more bickering. Once upon a time the internet was there for its users. No more. Meet the new olichargs. You had the chance to do right, you fucked up instead. Thanks, Strickling.
In which we recognise the benefit of the bill to society is inversely proportional to how beneficial the name of the bill suggests it is.
Net protocols, new dns system.
Well, some Democrats also oppose this bill. So, I guess there is opposition from both Democrats and Republicans, but you only mention the Republicans, presumably to make them sound "evil". Congratulations!! You've officially arrived as a member of the press!!
If the US does legislate 'control of the Internet', they immediately lose that because it'll provoke the rest of the world into setting up an alternative.
It's only been the light touch so far and various US TLA's not being caught dicking with DNS so far that's kept a semblance of US control.
On one hand, the US actually has abused its control over DNS. It has revoked domain names for political reasons.
On the other hand, there is good reason to believe other countries would be even worse.
Ultimately, I think ICANN is a weakness in the internet architecture that should never have existed. Rather than handing it over, it should be abolished altogether.
Until they invent DNS version 3, which is not backwardly compatible, propriety, and of course, licensed per computing device, per year. The 'community' will give themselves, unlimited, in perpetuity, licenses.
I remember IANA
Apps! Round spheres need nigger apps!
That word community. Sounds caring sharing doesn't it? ICANN is technically a non-profit. In reality it's been a huge gravy train for all aboard. You can see that in all the ridiculous top level domain names they've spat out which have created a lot of confusion and added no real value but lined the pockets of ICANN's staff and partner businesses. So let us ditch the bullshit pure and simple: these latest changes are new ways for them to make money.
Interesting thing to note: I know Americans can never contemplate the idea that anybody may have freedom who isn't American let alone have MORE freedom in some ways but just bare with me okay. Here in my country - guess who does NOT run the country TLD. That's right - the government. They have no control over the TLD assigned to the country. .com and despite that the charity has too much money. They buy infrastructure, expand infrastructure, maintain it and pay salaries and still have cash left over - which they spend on charity projects, I managed quite a few of those which were about providing technology access to some of the poorest schools on earth.
When they tried to claim it was theirs to control - the people who do control it (a non-profit) shifted it to a foreign server and a massive revolt made the government back down very fast.
They also don't control any of the core second-level subdomains beneath the country TLD. In fact, none of THOSE are for profit entitites EITHER - they are all run by non-profit charities. When I say charities I mean it, the commercial subdomain rests with it's only registrar -a non-profit, the result is that the cost of a domain here is less than 10% of what it costs to register a
It's perfectly possible for key DNS infrastructure to be managed perfectly with neither government NOR corporate control - neither socialist nor profiteering motives - and the ENTIRE country has gotten NOTHING but benefit from this arrangement. No negative side effects observable whatsoever.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
The system is working and working fine. If other countries want to manage a DNS they should build their own Internet.
this planet s just foookng dooomed
i hope trump ends it
bare with me
Are you a nudist?
Better then had the person said "bear with me"... Then you may have to fear that he had a drunk Russian bear trained to do his bidding.
ICANN became a corporation - in every meaningful sense of the word - some time ago. They stopped acting like a government organization long ago and have focused on profit for years now. The "leaders" of ICANN entered into a machine that was fairly effective and orderly, now they have created dysfunctional chaos and arbitrary mish-mash instead. While the government isn't a fix-all, a cat walking across a keyboard repeatedly could make decisions that would be equally as beneficial as the idiots running ICANN.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
A few places are comparably free, but the vast majority of the world's population, regretfully, continues to live under regimes considerably more oppressive than the US. And I'm not talking just the usual suspects — like China or Russia — generally respectable places like India can be quite intolerant of unpopular opinions and authoritarian in controlling the information networks. It may seem crazy to Americans, but Germans and Brits, for another example, routinely get arrested simply for saying the wrong things on social media — in the US attempts to criminalize "hate speech" are still duly resisted.
Not to mention certain sunny locales, where one's had can be removed for apostasy.
Reducing America's control over the Internet will — inevitably and by definition — increase the share of control by these governments.
We've seen this before — UN's "Human Rights Council" is a good example of it. All of the things about it, that the so called "Liberals", dismiss as "myths", are actually quite true. It will happen to the Internet's governance — inasmuch as it needs any — as well.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Here's the thing.
ICANN transition isn't going to be to some benevolent non-profit like it is where you are. It's going to be a worst of all worlds situation.
Expect:
1) The religious freedom of Saudi Arabia
2) The political freedom of North Korea
3) The IP freedom of the United States
I kind of support Ted in this, but I wish he realized that allowing other parties to mess with DNS servers is the same as allowing them to mess with bandwidth and routing. Local ISPs could easily extort websites by blackholing their domains until they pay up.
The only way to prevent this is by regulation.
>Are you a nudist?
Sometimes. And I find that debates are much more enjoyable when everybody is naked. Some people you can admire while they talk, others you can laugh at. Just imagine how much more informative the republican primary debates would have been had the participants been naked ? Instead of arguing about who has the biggest hands as a proxy for penis size, we could have just seen who has the biggest dick. Instead people got it backwards and voted for the guy who WAS the biggest dick.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
And your evidence for this is ... what exactly ?
I mean, I think you were trying to use a slippery-slope fallacy but if so you didn't even do that very well since you failed to show any slope.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *