ICANNs role [was: Re: On-going ...]

Tue Apr 3 11:04:42 UTC 2007

On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Andy Davidson wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3 Apr 2007, at 03:02, Gadi Evron wrote:
> 
> > What are your thoughts on basic suggestions such as:
> > 1. Allowing registrars to terminate domains based on abuse, rather  
> > than just fake contact details.
> 
> I don't like this because its impossible to define abuse clearly  
> enough in this context.
> 
> If a fictitious web-shop 'nice-but-dim.com' get a box owned which has  
> the reverse dns set to something in that zone, is this abuse ?   
> Yes .. sort of, but it's no business of the registry.  Is registering  
> a domain name which causes offense to some people abuse ?  It might  
> be, but its no reason not to let the domain name registration go  
> through.  What if you and I fall out, and I manage to build a case  
> against you to get linuxbox.org de-registered ?  Do you want to spend  
> time and effort fighting it ?
> 
> Who arbitrates/polices this scheme ?
> 
> Who pays for any mistakes ?
> 
> Who decides when the domain name can be re-registered ?
> 
> What about when someone registers a domain name in an international  
> registry that doesn't want to implement the scheme, or perhaps isn't  
> allowed to because its governance forbids it ?

Now that we ask the questions, prhaps we can come up with *some* answers.

> 
> Some bad people have their names and numbers listed in the phone  
> book.  I can setup a fraudulent window cleaning company with no  
> desire to do a good job for any of my customers .. does this mean 411  
> or the yellow pages should delist me when someone complains ?  DNS is  
> another directory.
> 
> DNS is no more than a way for me to say "Hey, where's Fred', to get a  
> reply saying 'here he is'.  DNS shouldn't whisper in my ear, 'but  
> Fred is a bit dodgy'.  If Fred is doing something illegal he should  
> be in jail.  This analogy isn't very good, but I need another coffee  
> before I can think of a better one. :-)
> 
> 
> -a
> 