ICANN disses
August 31, 2002 12:03 PM Subscribe
ICANN disses the the dot. The guy who runs the Internet Multicasting Service teamed up with the guy who runs the Internet Software Consortium and submitted a proposal to mange the .ORG registry. ICANN's conslutants [sic] dumped on the proposal (300KB PDF) claiming it is among the worst proposals from a technical standpoint. Mind you, ISC produces the software that runs the DNS and actually operates root and top-level servers. And ICANN thinks they lack the technical mojo? Wow! Are we all ready to admit that ICANN is completely corrupt and beyond saving? More info here. (via IP)
So it seems this should be the next question, but I don't see anyone asking it:
If ICANN is widely recognized as corrupt, unaccountable to outside pressure or influence, and incapable of managing TLDs to the best benefit of the entire internet, is it time for groups like IETF or the people who actually run the root nameservers to take ICANN out of the loop and manage the TLDs in some other way?
Is anarchy better than corruption?
posted by mdeatherage at 1:02 PM on August 31, 2002
If ICANN is widely recognized as corrupt, unaccountable to outside pressure or influence, and incapable of managing TLDs to the best benefit of the entire internet, is it time for groups like IETF or the people who actually run the root nameservers to take ICANN out of the loop and manage the TLDs in some other way?
Is anarchy better than corruption?
posted by mdeatherage at 1:02 PM on August 31, 2002
>is it time for groups like IETF or the people who actually
>run the root nameservers to take ICANN out of the loop
>and manage the TLDs in some other way?
from the IMS/ISC response:
posted by webchick at 1:08 PM on August 31, 2002
>run the root nameservers to take ICANN out of the loop
>and manage the TLDs in some other way?
from the IMS/ISC response:
- Our roots are our current services operating on the Internet. You are invited to participate in our registry interoperability testbed, comment on technical notes, and examine our operational statistics.
- Our branches are the other people who use our code. You are invited to download our software for DNS and DHCP, and we are pleased to announce that training on our OpenReg open registration system will start early next year for our colleagues who run ccTLD and gTLD registries, as well as those that operate registries in corporations, universities, or other organizations that need to systematically delegate and allocate names.
posted by webchick at 1:08 PM on August 31, 2002
Here is a direct link to the IMS/ISC response...and for the PowerPoint slide making, BOGSATT* bureaucracy...there is an IMS/ISC response in a format they can parse [.PPT --> PDF]
posted by webchick at 1:16 PM on August 31, 2002
posted by webchick at 1:16 PM on August 31, 2002
mdeatherage - ICANN is largely empowered by an Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the US Dept. of Commerce. That MOU is due to expire this fall. I don't think Commerce (or Congress for that matter) has been highly supportive of ICANN, so it could become disenfranchised before the year is out.
But even if that happens, there will be significant damage left in their wake. The .ORG award probably will have been made. Domain profiteering will have become completely instutionalized.
webchick - The presentation is a hoot. Were you involved in developing it?
I gotta wonder, at this point is there anything that can be done to support IMS/ISC. I mean, besides pissing and moaning a lot. I've already got that base covered.
posted by chipr at 1:47 PM on August 31, 2002
But even if that happens, there will be significant damage left in their wake. The .ORG award probably will have been made. Domain profiteering will have become completely instutionalized.
webchick - The presentation is a hoot. Were you involved in developing it?
I gotta wonder, at this point is there anything that can be done to support IMS/ISC. I mean, besides pissing and moaning a lot. I've already got that base covered.
posted by chipr at 1:47 PM on August 31, 2002
>webchick - The presentation is a hoot.
>Were you involved in developing it?
I guess you could say that...I'm the woman who runs the Internet Multicasting Service with the guy who founded the Internet Multicasting Service who teamed up with the guy who runs the Internet Software Consortium and submitted a proposal to manage the .ORG registry.
posted by webchick at 2:36 PM on August 31, 2002
>Were you involved in developing it?
I guess you could say that...I'm the woman who runs the Internet Multicasting Service with the guy who founded the Internet Multicasting Service who teamed up with the guy who runs the Internet Software Consortium and submitted a proposal to manage the .ORG registry.
posted by webchick at 2:36 PM on August 31, 2002
>I gotta wonder, at this point is there anything
>that can be done to support IMS/ISC. I mean,
>besides pissing and moaning a lot. I've already
>got that base covered.
Hi...Here are a few ways you can help:
1> Keep spreading the dot.
2> Keep following the developments of ISC's open registry software (code-name: "OpenReg"). The system will be available in early September for public testing (look for news here).
3> Keep an eye on ICANN. The next step in the evaluation process is September 5 when ICANN releases the final staff recommendation (the ICANN Board makes their final decision in late September).
4> Attempt to let ICANN know your views. Public comment on the evaluation process is being posted in this moderated forum
*Thanks* for your support to date. It meant a lot to everyone at ISC and IMS when MetaFilter spread the dot.
posted by webchick at 3:44 PM on August 31, 2002
>that can be done to support IMS/ISC. I mean,
>besides pissing and moaning a lot. I've already
>got that base covered.
Hi...Here are a few ways you can help:
1> Keep spreading the dot.
2> Keep following the developments of ISC's open registry software (code-name: "OpenReg"). The system will be available in early September for public testing (look for news here).
3> Keep an eye on ICANN. The next step in the evaluation process is September 5 when ICANN releases the final staff recommendation (the ICANN Board makes their final decision in late September).
4> Attempt to let ICANN know your views. Public comment on the evaluation process is being posted in this moderated forum
*Thanks* for your support to date. It meant a lot to everyone at ISC and IMS when MetaFilter spread the dot.
posted by webchick at 3:44 PM on August 31, 2002
Wow, the clipart that the Gartner group uses is bizarre. They seem remarkably un-self-aware. Just removing that crap would lower the Dilbert quotient a little bit.
Is there a report backing up the Gartner group's report? A less summary report? Because on the surface, just barfing up three significant digits looks really, really bad to me. But who am I? Wine gets two sig digs, so who knows?
posted by Wood at 3:48 PM on August 31, 2002
Is there a report backing up the Gartner group's report? A less summary report? Because on the surface, just barfing up three significant digits looks really, really bad to me. But who am I? Wine gets two sig digs, so who knows?
posted by Wood at 3:48 PM on August 31, 2002
It seems to me that from a technical standpoint, Gartner's major complaint was that .org had not actually operated a registry before. Affilias/ISOC and NeuStar already operate TLD registries. Affilias and NeuStar have actual track records in very similar circumstances, and .org doesn't.
posted by cameldrv at 4:15 PM on August 31, 2002
posted by cameldrv at 4:15 PM on August 31, 2002
Aww, one of the proposals didn't like they didn't win the recommendation, and sour grapes ensues. I'm sorry, but who the hell is responsible for second-guessing the process? Don't the other folks who didn't "win" this contest feel the exact same way about being the best proposal submitted?
Geez, what is the point of this thread??????
posted by yarf at 6:12 PM on September 1, 2002
Geez, what is the point of this thread??????
posted by yarf at 6:12 PM on September 1, 2002
Gosh Yarf, that point might make a lot of sense if you read the proposals and that was your take. But, what if there really is an important issue at stake here?
The whole point of the letter that webchick and I prepared for ICANN (and imho the point of this thread) is that if people don't do their homework, they can't really have an informed opinion. I'd welcome your dissing our proposal (or even ICANN dissing it) if you (or they) have specific comments.
posted by CarlMalamud at 9:40 AM on September 2, 2002
The whole point of the letter that webchick and I prepared for ICANN (and imho the point of this thread) is that if people don't do their homework, they can't really have an informed opinion. I'd welcome your dissing our proposal (or even ICANN dissing it) if you (or they) have specific comments.
posted by CarlMalamud at 9:40 AM on September 2, 2002
« Older "...padded bras in my size did nothing for my... | Self-portraits with an edge. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Responses were very brief (few block diagrams) and many unknowns remain.
Overall, a thin proposal with little detail and documentation to support responses. Minimal description provided for services. Overall, generic approach to implementation and support.
Looks like ISC did not fulfill the marketspeak quota and the icann sicked their conslutants (good one chipr) on them.
It does look like ISC/IMS is the most technically proficient operator in the bunch. So much for professionalism.
Ugh. icann needs a hostile takeover or something. Their previous owners (anyone know that story?) left them so corrupt, it boggles the mind.
posted by azazello at 12:56 PM on August 31, 2002