what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs)
drc at virtualized.org
Fri Jun 27 18:06:15 CDT 2008
On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:30 PM, Bill Nash wrote:
>> On Jun 27, 2008, at 10:57 AM, Bill Nash wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, what are the problems you feel ICANN should be
>> spending its time on?
> For starters, has Verisign ever been sanctioned by ICANN for it's
> business practices,
You mean like Sitefinder?
> with stupid stuff occurring as late as what, this past February (the
> front running debacle)?
I suspect you've confused VeriSign with Network Solutions here (and I
can't comment on the NetSol stuff because ICANN was named in a lawsuit
on the topic).
> If ICANN is supposed to be encouraging competition, et cetera, why
> is Verisign still in business?
Well, for one reason, people continue to register their names in
(say) .NET... (:-)).
> Also, show me a single registrar that actually gaurantees their
> [concerns about registrars]
You have commented on the revision to the Registrar Accreditation
Agreement (http://www.icann.org/topics/raa/) I presume?
> How does an entire class of business truly serve the consumer with
> these kinds of policies?
Read a software EULA recently?
With that said, personally, I agree that more attention should be
spent on the welfare of the registrants. Unfortunately, given I work
for ICANN, my providing comments in the RAA public consultation along
those lines would be a bit ... awkward.
> I'll be the first to admit there's been progress made on the front
> of preventing domain theft and other shenanigans, but when it comes
> down to it, running a domain registry doesn't seem to be in the best
> interests of the primary consumers of such a product.
I'm not sure I follow this (did you mean registrar?), but I suspect it
depends on the registry.
So, other than slapping VeriSign and making registrars liable for more
stuff, what should ICANN be spending its time on? This is a serious
question (not saying I can fix anything, but I can push internally).
One of the personally frustrating things about ICANN processes is the
lack of input from the network operations community. One of the
reasons I'm spamming the NANOG list is to try to stir up folks from
this community to actually participate in ICANN processes because, as
should be apparent, it actually does matter...
(speaking only for myself)
More information about the NANOG