<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] DNS Root-Level Pollution
- To: David Scott <tlda@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] DNS Root-Level Pollution
- From: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:47:01 -0700
David Scott wrote:
If ICANN's structure where to completely fail, I mean 100% failure, what
is the real impact.
Here's what I wrote about this a few years back:
http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000233.html
What would happen were ICANN to vanish in a poof of money-colored smoke?
There would be an immediate and immense wailing from trademark law firms
as the partners rend their expensive suits. And the large registries,
particularly Verisign, would weep at the loss of the a plaint regulatory
agency that has gifted them magnificently and munificently over the years.
But from the point of view of internet users things would pretty much
remain the same.
ICANN is deeply and heavily engaged in the regulation of business
practices. The anti-trust questions of that role have never been
squarely faced. But nevertheless, ICANN regulates the domain name
marketplace.
That marketplace would not stop if the regulatory hand of ICANN were lifted.
From the point of view of packets moving across the internet, ICANN is
almost vanishingly absent from the actual operational aspects. The root
server operators have no relationship with ICANN except the L root,
which ICANN operates via its IANA role, and the F root which has a
contract best described as a mutual-hands-off-but-recognize-me pact.
The IP address system of the RIRs operates with very little interaction
with ICANN. IANA's number role has little day-to-day operational
impact. And the exact nature of the ICANN-IANA relationship and its
linkage to the IETF and other I-things is not one of clarity.
(I am of the strong belief that the entire operation of DNS does not
require the kind of imposed consistency that ICANN claims is necessary.
In other words, I think many of the problems that ICANN seems unable
to resolve - such as new TLDs - would be better solved in the absence of
any ICANN-like regulatory body. But that's a discussion for another day.)
--karl--
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|