ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Would Michael Palage or Vint Cerf care to answer these ones?


Title: Help
 
A few questions:
 
1. When DoC commissioned ICANN to administer the DNS, they stipulated that the DNS must be distributed fairly. Does that mean that all domain names should be made available to all people on equal terms? And are there examples of unfair distribution as a result of ICANN's policies, agreements, or failure to implement agreements?
 
2. When ICANN appointed Afilias as Registry operator for the .info namespace, was there potential for conflict of interest, as Afilias was a cartel of registrars, and therefore might gain advantage from controlling both the Registry and the Registrar end of the domain supply? Are there any examples of this conflict of interest, or of advantage being gained by Registrars in the cartel, as a result of the policies and practices of the Registry?
 
3. Why did Afilias implement a Sunrise policy that was so open to abuse, and was this policy and rules abused by people in Afilias or its cartel of registrars?
 
4. Since Afilias were already aware of the problem with Sunrise by August 7th 2001 (if not before) why did they decide to continue allowing registrations which were clearly invalid?
 
5. What specifically were the reasons for ignoring the Domebase Solution which would have protected the interests of all parties?
 
6. Why did Afilias decline to delete ineligible registrations before LR1, even when the registrants themselves requested such deletions, both directly and via their registrars?
 
7. Why did at least 2 Afilias Directors make ineligible registrations with fake TM details in the Sunrise?
 
8. Why did DomainBank, part of the Afilias cartel and closely linked to Afilias CEO Hal Lubsen, submit a large number of applications with zero data in the 4 mandatory TM fields, which was clearly forbidden in Appendix E of the Agreement?
 
9. Why did DomainBank charge over $15000 for a product they knew, under the terms of their own Agreement, they could not supply?
 
10. Why did Afilias (CEO: Hal Lubsen) go ahead and register these names for DomainBank, even though they were wholly ineligible, and in breach of Afilias's own rules? How can Afilias justify this abuse of process?
 
11. Is it true that one of the cartel members of Afilias (with a seat on the Afilias Board at the time) charged $500,000 to submit 4981 fake Sunrise names, with 1899-dated trademarks, and that Afilias declined to delete these names when the public heard about this, even after an admission of guilt from the registrant, and a request for deletion from the Registrar?
 
12. Is it true that both the .biz2B and the .info LR2 landrushes were "gamed" by insiders - both independent registrars and registrars in the Afilias cartel? Is it true that some registrars only applied for names for themselves and, by submitting very short lists without applications from the public, queue-jumped the round-robin system for their own benefit? Was this a "fair" way to distribute the DNS? Was it fair to the public at large?
 
13. Is it true that when this "gaming" of the process came to light after the .biz2B landrush, both Afilias AND Icann were asked to take action to prevent it happening again in LR2? Is it true that the Icann-Registrar liaison Dan Halloran was repeatedly asked to respond to these concerns about unfair distribution of the DNS? Is it true that 260 days later he has not even acknowledged these messages?
 
14. Is it true that after Afilias were warned about short queues, and took no action, their Director Moshe Fogel gained domains.info by applying for it through a very short list from his own Registrar company (also part of the cartel?)?
 
15. Is it true that Hal Lubsen the Afilias CEO reserved domain.info for his registrar company? Why did DomainBank deserve this desired name more than anyone else in the world? Was this fair distribution of the DNS, or just an example of a system which favoured certain people?
 
16. Is it true that Hal Lubsen has never defended the actions of either Afilias or DomainBank, or responded in any way to the detail of these serious concerns?
 
17. Is it true that DoC KNEW about all these concerns, but renewed ICANN's mandated without reference to them?
 
18. Is it true that ICANN, in an effort to eliminate critical elements within its own organisation, ignored the advice of the ALSC they commissioned, that proposed significant participation on the ICANN Board by elected representatives of ordinary Internet Users?
 
19. Is it true that ICANN subsequently decided to EXPEL those elected representatives who were already on the ICANN Board?
 
20. Is it true that, after the General Assembly of ICANN voted critically for a re-bid for ICANN's contract with DoC, it was announced that the individual membership of the GA would be phased out?
 
Lastly (though I have omitted probably 100 other questions)...
 
21. Is it REALLY true that ICANN has fulfilled its mandate to ensure the fair distribution of the DNS?
 
* * * * * * * * * * *
 
kind regards
 
Richard Henderson
 


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>