Why ICANN did the Right Thing [Was: Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx doma in]

Eric Brunner-Williams brunner at nic-naa.net
Sat May 13 03:02:16 UTC 2006

hey ferg,

its not that interesting an analysis. struan doesn't really close on any
policy issue, and concludes with the usual:

	I think ICANN was right to reject the current proposal.
	Because it does little more than add yet another domain
	to the internet that nobody needs.

now how reflective is that, really? is there a number n, or a rate of
change of n, that is needed? that icann is ... authorized ... to set?

sartorial legislation (laws against commoners wearing velvet, etc.) isn't
novel, and i'm fairly plain myself, but how many brands is enough?

think of all the policy elements not explored. registrars aren't limited
to convicted offenders, pick your statute and jurisdiction to taste, like
justice potter. registrants don't actually have to show their material is
banned in boston, for some values of boston.

bottom line, the author of the analysis doesn't appear to have much grasp
of registry proposants, or registry economics, or registrar economics, or
icann history-as-politics.

i wouldn't pay him money to write part of a registry proposal, and i wouldn't
want him making business decisions for a registrar, and he sure doesn't have
a grasp of how the dns is used to non-graphically, using no skin tones at
all, to the detriment of the users who hope that by paying us money they will
get a working net.

and "xxx" means corn liquor, white lightnig, the comfort in gran'ma's tea
and the source of her pin money.


More information about the NANOG mailing list