[ga] Net Keepers
You are certainly right. But beyond a change in policy we have witnessed
the formalization of a change in the nature of the iCANN, which has now
established its new target: to rule the Internet in using a rigid non
innovative TLD contract model (VeriSign, bilateral/trilateral ccTLDs,
gTLDs), targeting a full governorship over the SLDs themselves (cf. .biz,
.org / UDRP).
I certainly understand the logic. But on several examples like the
trilateral contracts, that logic turns being irrealist. It is also in
opposition with the White Paper and the whole Internet story, nature and
This de facto monopolistic private ownership of the Internet by a few
individuals results from a subtle competition established between
GAC/USG (for an international legitimacy), the various ccTLDs ('divide to
reign' and to keep control of the Internet local communities) and
VRSN/gTLDs for the financial and technical DNS aspects. Some other
additional controversial equilibriums like DNSO vs @large, ... US Staff vs
multinational stakeholders... add some pieces to the chessplate.
On 18:01 03/04/01, Roberto Gaetano said:
>I still think that to be able to run (and now without time constraints
>and/or other future limitations) the Registry and the Registrar for the
>major generic TLD *is* giving to VeriSign unfair competitive edge.
>As I said, the matter may now be moot, but IMHO we have just witnessed the
>formalization of a change in policy by ICANN.
This situation is not acceptable to many and IMHO will lead to an
international anti-trust action we already see the seeds in the USA, in
Europe and in Far-East at top political level. This action will create
development delays and major instabilities. The only solution we have left
to develop a stable approach is to use the "low interest" tools (in
Vint/Staff's opinion): DNSO, DNSO/GA, @large, DNS software analysis, TLDA,
This happens while the Chair of the DNSO/GA is at its weakest with only now
I therefore suggest this: to gather an informal working group of seasoned
people and ready to invest corporations, wanting genuinely to work for the
stability and the development of a deregulated and financially distributed
Internet. Each of them explaining his intellectual, technical, financial,
etc... interest in an Internet by the users for the users (hence the
subject "the net keepers"). They will focus on a stable vision of the
Internet progressively embodied through a pragmatic rewriting of the RFC
1591. This RFC should be based upon experience and become the international
White Paper of the Internet users. The positions taken will have to be
explained and documented to Govs, corporations, user associations,etc... It
should also help/catalyze the development of one or several commercial/non
profit DNS galaxies to complement the VeriSign Galaxy. These are the early
days of Airbus vs Boeing.
As a construed action it would call for a lot of money. As a coordination
spirit it does not: the idea is only to help our political and
commercial synergies. I am sure it can achieve much. Actualy being cheap,
stable, reliable and light is exactly what we want to achieve. Being it in
our own relations should be a strength?
People interested in joining/discussing the concept please respond on the
DNSO/GA or privately (not to inform the iCANN of the whole picture
immediately). I will help as a secretariat should the idea take off.
I want to underline that in my mind this is NOT a competition with any
existing effort or a diversion, but to the contrary a way to help
developing a mutual and focussed assistance among the "loyal opposition"
now a "determined opposition". Just two opposite examples: the established
DNSO/GA may now be the key place after the seemingly hi-jacking of the
@large. The new born TLDA may be of precious help if it enlarges its
concerns to all the TLD managers interests. And there are many others.
Again nothing formal. Just: "hi! I am here, I want to be counted in that
talk" or "we should ask xxxx".
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html