US to relinquish control of Internet
Wayne E Bouchard
web at typo.org
Sun Mar 16 00:25:03 UTC 2014
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 08:08:47PM -0400, John R. Levine wrote:
> >The ITU is an agency of the United Nations. Which is an organization
> >created by treaty, of which various nations' governments are members.
> Actually, the ITU is more than twice as old as the UN, and merged with the
> UN in 1947. As noted in a previous message, the ITU has both government
> and non-government members, more of the later than the former, which
> arguably makes it a multi-stakeholder entity. I entirely believe that
> NTIA doesn't want the ITU involved with ICANN, but the ITU has made it
> abundantly clear over the years that it wants a seat at the table,
> preferably its own table.
> I listened to the ICANN press conference this morning, the gist of which
> was don't worry, nothing will change, but once the NTIA opens up the ICANN
> management contract (or whatever it's called these days) to other parties,
> keeping the ITU out will be a challenge.
Yes, the ITU is a very old agreement. It's also been more or less
painless to us on the low end of the ladder even though of late they
are doing their best to screw it up.
Personally, I'm not too terribly worried about ICANN. Granted, the
politicians have gotten markedly more efficient at converting gold
into sh** in recent years but I think it will take them quite a while
to royally fk up the internet, especially if they are relying on going
through ICANN to do it.
What's the worst they can do at this point? Make .bobtodd and
.bubbagump TLDs? This is different from some of the crap we've got now
in what way??
web at typo.org
More information about the NANOG