Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz contract
1. I am impressed by the willingness of Veni as an ICANN BoD Member to dedicate time to the GA. Let not harass him. 2. May be could we gert real (my plea for years). All this is a bluff: that the NTIA root file is important. That was true in Postel's day, when his Internet was a system with external gateways, with attached costs to support them, interface their constraints, and sometimes pay their bills. The "Magic 13" were of importance to manage and reduce these costs. This time is over for a long. Then the domain names were used as a way to collect money for Postel budget to pay the net. This time is over. There is neither legitimacy nor use in ICANN, irt the DNS. Worse, maintaining the root server system as something mandatory is absurd. Should the root server system disapear, I do think the resulting partial problem would probably fade in one or two days. There are years I do not use it, except as an information for the root file I maintain out of the top zone reality, checking the various TLDs nameservers. Which is sometimes quite different. That bluff has created two industries. One is money making (registering names at $ 0;02 + ICANN costs) the other is user support - often non-profit - (registering names and really supporting users at $ 20 to 50 real per annum). ICANN manages the first industry and is disregarded by the other. This archaic ambiguous situation survived the alt-roots (under many false pretences) because they did not provide additional service value enough. This is not the case with the Multilingual Internet. The Multilingual Internet shows 80% of the potential users that the ICANN system with its root server system prevent them from using the Internet. So, there is no problem: the Multilingual Internet does not oppose ICANN, but considers it only for interoperability. The best example is China. They do not oppose, they do something else and respect the ICANN rules when interacting with ICANN subordinated users. This creates many problems because the IETF has not understood what is the Multilingual Internet and (wants to) confuse(s) it with its Internationalized American English Internet, with major commercial interests trying to block its intefacing with the Multilingual practices. However, this should not overlooked: the days of the ASCII only ccTLDs are counted. So are most probably the gTLDs the way they are today. The only reason why $ 0.02 registrations costs without customized support could be billed $ 6 or 10, is if they came in parallel in 150 languages. In not considering the impact of ML DNs, aliases and keyworkds, and sticking to the archaïc and over crowded ".com" as a reference ICANN, Verisign and the DN pseudo-industry are running into the wall of reality. Their industry syndicate - ICANN - is not doing anything to help them. Because it just not know what to do, in most of the cases has not understood what is at stake, why and how. Here is the real problem. jfc
|