Jay,
> The only two documents that somewhat address your question to
> my knowledge are the White Paper and the ICANN/NTIA/MoU.
>
May I take it, then, that the *functions* are
1) Assignment of numerical addresses to Internet users.
2) Management of the system of registering names for Internet
users.
3) Operation of the root server system.
4) Protocol Assignment ?
To my eye, 1 and 3 are met by the registries, while the 'system' of
registering names is up in the air, depending on the weight given to
trademark interests, and counting on WIPO adjudication to sort out
the consequences. (Is Protocol assignment a serious affair? Are
we going to abandon TCP/IP?)
The White Paper then goes on to list some of the *problems* that
face the net:
_ There is widespread dissatisfaction about the absence of
competition in domain name registration.
_ Conflicts between trademark holders and domain name
holders are becoming more common. Mechanisms for resolving
these conflicts are expensive and cumbersome.
_ Many commercial interests, staking their future on the
successful growth of the Internet, are calling for a more formal and
robust management structure.
_ An increasing percentage of Internet users reside outside of
the U.S., and those stakeholders want to participate in Internet
coordination.
_ As Internet names increasingly have commercial value, the
decision to add new top-level domains cannot be made on an ad
hoc basis by entities or individuals that are not formally
accountable to the Internet community.
Now the interesting thing to me is, ICANN is a *sequel to two
earlier versions:
In May of 1996, Dr. Postel proposed the creation of multiple,
exclusive, competing top-level domain name registries... The
IAHC issued a draft plan in December 1996 ... [which] was
criticized for its aggressive technology development and
implementation schedule, for being dominated by the Internet
engineering community, and for lacking participation by and
input from [*]business interests and others in the Internet
community.(13) Others criticized the plan for failing to solve the
[*]competitive problems that were such a source of
dissatisfaction among Internet users and for imposing
unnecessary burdens on [*]trademark holders.
The impression I get, in other words is that the
> > problem or problems ICANN or NewCo [*as distinct from Postel's
> > draft or the IAHC propposal*] was designed to treat
were not technical, but commercial. Thus, two years later, we have
Policy oversight [being] undertaken in a separate council called
the [ICANN] with seats allocated to specified stakeholder
groups. Further, the [DNSO proposal] formally introduce[s]
[WIPO] for resolving trademark/domain name disputes...
I wouldnt want to say anyone has jumped from a frying pan into a
fire, but has this endless 'process' (IFWP et al) made the least bit
of difference? Hasnt the 'problem' been solved for some time now?
Where is all this 'trust' stuff coming from? Which war are we
fighting?
kerry
