Re: [ICANN-EU] Interview with ICANN director Helmut Schink

[Gerhard Wendebourg <gwhh@gmx.de>]

Of course I see, that developing / forcing an alternate root-server-system
is not very easy and simple and will cause some problems and conflicts.
But so we have the chance, to solve these problems under the participation
of the Internet-User-Community instaed of an autocratic institution
established to realize first the interests of the commercial net(ab)use and
the US-Government.

I think, that an At Large Community can effort the ressources to realize
(on the long) a stable working system and its democratic administration,
which the ICANN obviously don't want to serve.
If you look at the developing of Linux you will see, that a non-commercial
/ non-governmental action comes to professional results, that you must not
hide and that can stand  an approval for stable working.

Politically we are now at nearly the same state, the american people were
before there revolution in the 18th century: they were ruled by an overseas
government, that didn't much care about their needs, and so gone into the
risk of chaotic / unstable self-regulating and so born the USA.
There's always a risk of unstability if you get to democratic /
non-hierarchical ruling, but its worth, to go for this - even if you look
at the economical results.


At 13:36 12.11.00 +0100, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
>Dear Gerhard,
>
>> One of the ways is of course the etablishing and publishing of alternate
>> root-servers:
>> if the At Large Community (?!) decides to support them instead of dealing
>> with an ICANN-Administration, where a user-participation is not really
>> intended, maybe the day will come, when the ICANN looks at an growing
>> paralell (alternate) universe, that is no more object to their
administrating.
>> We would so have an ICANN-commercial-Internet-Community on one side and on
>> the other an At Large-Net-Citizen-Community from people, that are ruling
>> and administrating themselves.
>> If things like this are really on the way, the ICANN might take a new look
>> on the situation and think, that Users / At Large-Members are worth, to
>> have some regards to.
>
>in my view, this (alt.roots) would be the very very last and 
>desperate resort if ICANN fails altogether. I recognize that 
>the notion of being 'alternative' seems to fascinate many,
>but I currently don't see how this really solves any of the 
>problems.
>
>First of all, if you have the impression that the
>alternative root servers are free from lawyers, trademark
>problems and the like, I think the main reason for that is that 
>few people/companies care about what few people see. Some time 
>ago, I calculated that the ASLAN alternative root server gets as
>many querys in a month as the 'legacy' root server A (one of
>thirteen) gets in seven minutes. This relation may have changed
>a bit, but for the majority of Internet users (and trademark 
>attorneys), the alternative root servers still are simply 
>invisible. As alternative root servers gain popularity, 
>companies will try to sue perceived cybersquatters also in the 
>alternative name space.
>By the way: E.g. the alternative Name.Space project has a Famous 
>Names policy in place and "has already revoked several obviously 
>infringing registrations".
>
>Secondly, alternative root servers are only root servers run
>by different people. Whether they are better or worse depends
>on who runs them (and who uses them). Currently, it seems the 
>alt.roots are maintained mainly by very small companies, some for
>idealistic, some for more mundane monetary reasons. 
>If there was a major decline in use of the 'legacy' (ICANN/US
>Government) root servers, I doubt that it would stay like this.
>To run a worldwide root server system, you need experience and
>money. I would not be surprised to see Microsoft.Root™ or 
>AOLTimeWarnerDNS™ -- just pre-configure major browsers, open
>up some interesting sites and start a major campaign. How about
>a EU Root Server System administered by the European Commission?
>All this would be 'alternative', but would it be an alternative?
>
>Thirdly, the tipping over would play havoc with the Internet.
>Currently, there are unique assignments if you stay on the 
>'legacy' root. If there were several large name spaces, you
>would have to add the name space to the address -- e.g. I want
>to send a mail to gerhard@wendebourg.nom@icannroot, not to
>gerhard@wendebourg.nom@msroot. Now, if you are lucky, the
>different name spaces are coordinated in some way, so that
>there is only one wendebourg.nom around. But how, according
>to what rules, and by whom shall they be coordinated? What
>happens in cases of multiples claims to a TLD? There would 
>be a need for META-ICANN (or rather: the problem would
>have been transferred up one level).
>
>Whichever way we choose, there will always be conflicts. 
>I don't believe in any scheme that miraculously makes these
>conflicts go away. Instead, we have to find ways to solve
>these conflicts in a fair manner. Alt.roots are good in 
>that they put a bit of pressure on ICANN by showing that
>there are other options, but I doubt that they are the key
>to success.
>
>Best regards,
>/// Alexander
>
>
-------------------------------------
Gerhard Wendebourg          eMail: gw@hwx.de
U&K NetWorX GbR      /       Freelance Networx
WebDesign - Datenbanken - Internet-Projekte
Buergernetz-Hamburg e.V. 
fon: +49 40 38613652  fax +4969 791235645
Postadresse:     PF 106104, D-20042 Hamburg