Re: [atlarge-discuss] An opportunity to help

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

On 06:19 04/06/03, DannyYounger@cs.com said:
> What is probably called for is the development of a set of "Best Practices 
> for ISPs" that has the blessing of ICANN's ISP
This is an important issue. It should not be left to best practices. 
ICANN's mandate is to warranty the stability of the legacy name space. This 
kind of practice is probably the first cause of instability. It mainly 
results from a wrong understanding of the domain name nature as a product 
sold to the registrant instead of being a service to the user to locate the 
internet presences of a registrant.

There are several ways of lobbying for that:

1. one is to develop the http://uniname.org project which targets to 
aggregate the DNS into the initial GNS (generalized naming system) for 
e-networks and into the UNS (Universal naming System). Rules established at 
the UNS or GNS systems layers, if not respected at the DNS layer, then 
become exceptions that ICANN will have to document and may be defend.

2. another one is to produce a draft RFC for information at the IETF on the 
nature and of the life long character of the user names. The various 
problems created by the coming in of the IDNs permit to do that. As Chair 
of the Eurolinc-WG-IDN I am certainly interested in any cooperation to 
jointly write such a draft. It will then serve to challenge ICANN on the 
DNS technical stability issue.

3. another one is to make direct pressure on the economy of the Registry 
industry through attractive offers to the users in the free and value added 
registration services area. In particular through scTLDs.

4. The Marrakech Resolution of ITU opens interesting avenues in that area 
we certainly want to develop. An interesting idea would be to have ccTLDs 
contracts made quadrilateral to include ITU-T in order to warranty the 
support of the Telco industry to the use and the development of ccTLDs.

Globally the target is that the real owner of a DN (and not his accepted 
trustee) is acknowledged as the designated target of the calls using his 
domain name, life long and not year long + being subject to disagreement or 
failure of a merchant or cover. This goes through a change from WhoIs to 
QuiEst (documentation on the web by the registrant to the users), a 
replacement of registration by a declaration, a universal right to naming, 
a drastic enlargement of the number of TLDs, etc. We have to realize that 
however conservative steps may partly address the problem, the solution is 
as drastic as I describe it and that ICANN knows it. Changing the DN legal 
equilibrium is endangering the very existence of ICANN.

So, no real action can develop if the survival of ICANN is not first 
addressed and ICANN is documented an attractive position in such a scheme 
(where money will not come anymore from Registries). If we do not develop 
such a scheme, there will be no response. With some serious @large of this 
community and from other groups we have engaged that kind of quadruple action.

jfc


















---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de