[ga] The fall of the iCANN Empire?

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

A new mission for the iCANN?

>ICANN's President and CEO M. Stuart Lynn said, "It is in the interests
>of all Internet users-commercial and private, businesses and
>individuals-that ICANN continue to develop and mature as a vehicle for
>consensus policy development. These new agreements, by eliminating much
>of the unique legacy treatment of VeriSign/NSI, will be a major step in
>that direction. They will help to maintain the continuing stability of
>the DNS as an important and effective part of the Internet, and will
>improve the ability of ICANN to serve as an effective administrator of
>this important resource."
>
>For more information on the ICANN/VeriSign registry agreements, see
><http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/>.

The iCANN has no more the mission to keep the Name Space
(actually the Legacy Name Space) stable, but the DNS itself ....

What I explained yesterday and for weeks is under confirmation: there
will be a new "stable" DNS system under VRSN license and iCANN label
with a M$ 200 development budget and a first customer: ".org" managed
by the iCANN with a M$ 5 initial funding and a sub-licence to iCANN TLDs
(entrance fee of $ 50.000). With one million TLD targeted (cf. MDR
GAC open session, this represents a fair return to NSI's R&D).

This is a pure take away of the entire Internet for which they need the
Govs support against the DoC, in the best interest of a Name Space
stability (I mean the TM Name Space :-) ).

Question: are the current viruscoms talks of the town a thread on the
network, on the iCANN or a way for the iCANN/VRSN alliance to
accelerate the DNS change to a VRSN certified/protected, iCANN
stamped and Louis Touton fossilized TLD model compatible DNS?


But, viruscoms, New.net, MultiBind, SubRoots are here now ...

Actually, I am afraid that Mike Roberts' wording of the Yokohama
resolution on new TLDs has open a case of worms (we told him
immediatley) leading to a no-more-controlable situation.

Would it be realistic the legacy RSC (iCANN) would propose ASAP an
alliance to the other RSCs and a negociation with Name.Space and
New.net to see how to cope with the current situation. But at the
holy trinity, Louis and Joe are no software developpers (may be Louis?)
so only Vint may understand the danger... but he supported plan B and
he probably thinks he can cope with it using his current plan.

At the BoD Alejandro Pisanty and certainly the three who opposed the
Plan B, may be a few others, have the technical competence to
understand that the iCANN plan is too slow and too legally/politically
hazardeous to cope with the current time frame (probably a few days
before the first viruscoms spread around, last friday if "porn.com" is
not just a leak).

Jefsey





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