[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] *IF* ICANN fails what about UN?
That's a much better reference. I will look into this tomorrow. Thanks a
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Ben Edelman wrote:
> In my prior message, I should also have mentioned an article in the Berkley
> Technology Law Journal that Jonathan wrote on the same subject -- expanding
> in somewhat greater detail on the question of "What if ICANN Fails?"
> I think I appropriately characterize this article to say that the
> alternatives to ICANN all have serious risks and shortcomings. In
> particular, of the possibility of an inter-governmental entity taking over
> ICANN's responsibilities, he comments:
> "... It is not clear to me that such an organization would make policies
> that are any more in touch with the Internet community than those proposed
> by a well-functioning ICANN. More importantly, as the historical context
> suggests, the power of the root derives from the fact that a critical mass
> of system administrators and “mirror” root zone server operators choose to
> follow it. A drastic turnaround in the management of Internet top-level
> functions—either through a sea change in favor of much more aggressive
> government involvement, or one that purports to literally privatize the
> whole system (imagine auctioning it off to the highest bidder)—could result
> in abandonment of the network by the technical or user community. RealNames
> might seem a more appealing alternative to addressing than it has to date.
> Engineers who run the domain name servers (that in turn sub-scribe to the
> root server for information about domain names) might simply point the
> servers elsewhere. The web of contracts currently buttressing the natural
> network effects (that auger only one predominant naming scheme) do not yet
> reach to every Internet service provider. Universities, companies like
> Prodigy or the Microsoft Network, and large corporations could cease
> listening to Jon Postel’s “legacy root” for authoritative information about
> <.com>, <.net>, and <.org>."
> Surely there exist other scholarly commentaries on the subject, but I
> unfortunately know of no others.
> Ben Edelman
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 8:16 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] *IF* ICANN fails what about UN?
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, Ben Edelman wrote:
> > When the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the US House
> > Commerce Committee held hearings on the DNS system this summer, they asked
> > precisely this question of those called to testify before then.
> > Jonathan Zittrain, director of the Berkman Center, answered the question
> > posted his response online. See
> > <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/zittrainqfrs.pdf> (question one, pages 1-2).
> I've read the text on the URL above but it doesn't particulary well
> address the issue of a new UN body addressing Internet issues. Do you know
> of more views on the matter?
> I think it would be wise to know what might happen if more and more
> scholars leave the GA (for various reasons) and ICANN gains no support.
> This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
> Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html