On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
> At 1:39 PM -0800 1/21/99, Jim Dixon wrote:
>
> >In the more real world, the DNS is (a) of transient significance
> >(it's going to be replaced by directory search systems) and (b) of
> >marginal financial importance. Things are further confused by
> >people hoarding thousands of domain names. Under these circumstances,
> >exactly why should ICANN's membership consist of all TLD domain name
> >holders?
>
> My understanding is ICANN is required to have an at-large membership.
>
> I honestly can't think of a better constituency for the at-large
> membership of ICANN than registrants of gTLD domain names.
>
> Especially on the basis of automatic membership with domain name
> registration and one registrant, one vote regardless of the number of
> domain names held. Problems related to member approval and
> verification, accreditation, dues collection, capture by special
> interests, equity, overhead complexity and expenses, and others, are
> reduced or eliminated by simply enfranchising registrants of gTLD
> domain names. In my mind this is the 'let's keep it simple' approach.
Many things are simple. Failure is one of them.
Some people believe that ICANN's membership will be something like
2,000 people. If the right to vote is based only on registration of
a domain name, it would be trivial for me or anyone else able to program
and having a full time connection to the Internet to create ICANN voters
in any desired quantity by an automated process. So we could win any
ICANN election. If we were to use the InterNIC to register domain names,
it could be done at zero cost.
I won't do this. Other people will. These phantom voters will be joined
by our Jeff, Frank Rizzo, and a host of similarly imaginary or imaginative
netizens.
Some will claim that it is possible to construct a registration process
which will eliminate the phantom voters. I submit that the difficulties
that these various lists have had in deciding who Jeff Williams really
is are ample evidence of how difficult this would be.
It isn't just the phantoms that are a problem; it is also the whimsical:
those who will become ICANN activists simply because they have nothing
else to do, or because they see it as a world government in evolution,
or because they simply enjoy strutting the cyber-stage.
This whole debate is primarily of interest to those with interest in
the DNS because that is where the Internet failed. Those whose
interests are in areas where IANA and the Internet have succeeded
generally are not involved in this debate. That doesn't mean that
they are insignificant. Quite the contrary.
The Internet is an enterprise, or set of enterprises, of enormous
personal and financial significance to many people. Many people have
devoted their lives to its development. Others have invested their
life savings in it. The number of people whose careers involve the
Internet is exploding.
Most of these people will be appalled if they learn that core functions
of the Internet are at risk of falling under the control of an ICANN
whose membership consists in large part of phantoms, Net kooks, the
fanciful, and people pursuing political agendas that have nothing to do
with the Internet.
These people, the ones who are seriously involved with the Internet,
will recoil in horror from your 'keep it simple' ICANN. They will
scramble to keep the core assets at risk -- the DNS, operation of the
root servers, IP address space, and protocol development -- out of
ICANN's grasp. They will make sure that no further responsibilities
come ICANN's way.
A small amount of thought might persuade you that this process is already
well under way. The root servers remain with NSI. The root zone is
frozen. The RIRs, the regional IP address space registries, are thinking
things over. RFC editing has been moved away from IANA. The IETF isn't
terribly keen on the PSO.
So while I understand the attractions of simplicity, I suggest that you
look for a more complex solution, one that has a chance of working.
--
Jim Dixon Managing Director
VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of Council Telecommunications Director
Internet Services Providers Association EuroISPA EEIG
http://www.ispa.org.uk http://www.euroispa.org
tel +44 171 976 0679 tel +32 2 503 22 65
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
