Re: [ga-roots] Alternate Roots, Naming Systems Coming Under Fire

["NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Not even worthy of a response.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>
To: "[ga-roots]" <ga-roots@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 1:42 AM
Subject: [ga-roots] Alternate Roots, Naming Systems Coming Under Fire


> Alternate Roots, Naming Systems Coming Under Fire
> By Juliana Gruenwald, Interactive Week
> June 4, 2001 2:51 PM ET
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2768503,00.html
>
> STOCKHOLM, Sweden - The group charged with managing the Internet's Domain
> Name System may have encouraged the formation of alternate top-level
Domain
> Name Systems by moving too slowly to select new groups of global Internet
> domain names, some Internet industry representatives and others said.
>
> During the quarterly four-day meeting of the Internet Corporation for
> Assigned Names and Numbers, business interests, technicians and others
> voiced concern about the potential impact of alternate "roots," and a new
> system developed by New.net that allows its customers to register names in
> what appear like new global top-level domains (gTLDs) like .shop or .xxx.
>
> Neither approach has been approved by ICANN, which was picked in 1998 by
the
> U.S. government to manage the Internet's DNS, for entry into the
Internet's
> main root system. Some worry that these alternative efforts could
> destabilize the Internet or cause consumer confusion.
>
> Alternate roots are separate networks that allow users to register names
in
> top-level domain names (TLDs) not seen by most people who use the
Internet.
> New.net, however, offers users two different ways to register or view its
> TLDs. The company has agreements with some Internet service providers that
> ensure their customers can view New.net's TLDs. Users also can download
> software that allows them access to names that are actually part of the
> company's existing domain name, new.net. For example, a user who
registered
> "flower.shop," would actually be registering "flower.shop.new.net," but
the
> software hides the "new.net."
>
> There is "a lot of angst and concern from trademark owners concerning
> alternate roots and naming systems causing concern about the technical
> stability and consumer confidence," said J. Scott Evans, chairman of the
> International Trademark Association's subcommittee on domain governance,
> during a public forum Sunday at ICANN's meeting.
>
> Alternate roots have been around for several years but have generally been
> low-budget operations used by few Internet surfers because they require
> users to point their computers to different servers. But concerns about
> those who offer alternatives to the Internet's traditional DNS, which
allows
> users to use names instead of the protocol numbers registered to each Web
> site, have been heightened with the launch of New.net. The company has
> managed to gain agreements from major ISPs such as EarthLink and is being
> financially backed by a well-known Internet incubator, Idealab!.
>
> ICANN's president, M. Stuart Lynn, also increased the issue's profile with
> the release of a draft paper prior to ICANN's meeting arguing for the need
> to ensure a "single, authoritative public root for the Internet Domain
Name
> System." He and others argue that alternate roots run the danger that
> computers will be given different answers to the same queries they make
over
> the DNS.
>
> Some businesses also worry systems like the one New.Net uses also will
> confuse consumers, particularly if ICANN chooses to create new global TLDs
> using names similar to ones now being offered by New.net.
>
> "We're concerned . . . potential customers might not reach our sites,"
said
> Rick Lane, who handles e-commerce policy issues for the U.S. Chamber of
> Commerce.
>
> New.net officials, however, say that they make it clear to their customers
> that not all Web users can access sites with their TLDs.
>
> Still, others argue that ICANN may have helped create the problem by not
> moving fast enough to create new gTLDs and has taken much longer to
complete
> contracts with the operators of the new domain names than even ICANN
> expected.
>
> ICANN approved seven new gTLDs last November but has completed contracts
> with only two of them, though the group said it is close to finishing
> others. At least two of them, .biz and .info, could become available to
the
> public in the next few months. They will be the first new global domain
> names created since .com, .net and .org, the most popular Internet domain
> names, were introduced more than a decade ago.
>
> Some operators of the new TLDs "are concerned that the length of the
process
> for negotiating the new (TLD) agreements encouraged companies like New.net
> and alternate roots" said Jeff Neuman, director of policy and intellectual
> property at NeuLevel, co-operator of the new .biz TLD.
>
> After ICANN rejected his group's application to operate a .union TLD,
Duncan
> Pruett, information technology coordinator for the International
> Confederation of Free Trade Unions, said he was approached by the
operators
> of some alternate roots about using their networks to launch his gTLD. He
> said he opted against such a move because it "might have prejudiced
> [ICANN's] attitude against us."
>
> Steve Chadima, New.net's chief marketing officer, said if ICANN had agreed
> to create more gTLDs and implemented them faster, "there would be no
reason
> for us to exist."
>
> Lynn acknowledged in an interview that it is a "realistic concern" that
> ICANN's approach to new gTLDs may have helped spur some alternative
> approaches. But he added that ICANN has little choice but to take a
careful
> approach to introducing new gTLDs to ensure they do not hurt Internet's
> stability. ICANN officials have described the introduction of new gTLDs as
a
> test bed and said they hope to introduce new ones in the future more
> quickly.
>
> When ICANN moves to introduce a second round of new gTLDs, Chadima said
his
> company will likely apply to ICANN to operate some of them.
>
> "The backers of these systems seem to work under the philosophy that if
they
> get there first with something that looks like a TLD and invite many
> registrants to participate, then ICANN will be required by their presence
to
> recognize in perpetuity these pseudo TLDs," Lynn wrote in his paper.
> "Nothing could be further from the truth."
>
> Elliot Noss, president of Tucows, a company that offers wholesale
> registrations of domain names, said his company would have been forced to
> take the same route as New.net without receiving such assurances from
ICANN.
>
> "We feared that special priority [would be given] to somebody with some
> level of established user base," he said. "The last thing we wanted to do
is
> create an alternative. We feared we might have to defensively."
>
> While Lynn and others say ICANN can do little about alternative approaches
> beyond stressing the importance of a single root, ICANN board member
> Jonathan Cohen suggested Monday at ICANN's board meeting that the names
> being offered by these alternative operators should be given to someone
else
> when ICANN moves to introduce a second round of new gTLDs.
>
> "There should be clear notice to those out there on alternate roots, if
they
> choose a top-level domain because they think they can move faster than we,
> that won't prevent us from choosing it," Cohen said. "Otherwise it's open
> season."
>
> But at least one ICANN board member, Karl Auerbach, takes a different view
> on the issue, saying that "there need not be a single uniform namespace
that
> everyone conforms to."
>
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html