North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: ICANNs role [was: Re: On-going ...]
So you are the guys asleep at the guard post? :)
Something ICANN is frequently accused of.
1. Allowing registrars to terminate domains based on abuse, rather than
Seems like a reasonable idea to me, but wouldn't that be a contractual term between the registrar and registrant?
2. Following these incidents as they happen so that YOU, in charge, can
Sorry, who is in charge?
3. For true emergencies threatening the survivability of the system, shoudln't we be able to black-list a domain in the core?
I don't understand this one. What's "the core" in this context?
4. Black lists for providers are not perfect, but perhaps they could help
Perhaps they could. Not sure what ICANN would have to do with this though (unless you're suggesting ICANN runs a blacklist? If so, I suspect ICANN's legal counsel would have ... concerns).
5. Enforcing that registrars act in say, not a whitehat fashion, but a not blackhat fashion?
Sorry, what does this mean?
6. Yours here?
Sorry, haven't really looked into this space, so I don't yet have suggestions.
1. Rather than terminate on fake details - verify details before a domain
Isn't this a business practice of the registrars? I gather you're suggesting ICANN take a much more aggressive role with registrars?
2. Domains are a commodity, ICANN should know, what of putting them under
My observations are that the relationship between ICANN and the registry/registrar folks is much less dictatorial than you appear to assume.
The whole system is almost completely unregulated, and this is money you
There are many who argue quite forcefully that ICANN is not a regulator.
You have a long way to go before claiming to take care of the Internet.
I don't think ICANN has ever claimed this.
Please take that route if you believe you can. The Internet needs your help.
You seem to believe ICANN has a much greater role in Internet management than it has. ICANN can't even make changes to a name server in the root zone without US government approval.
How about some funding for research projects? Getting involved and perhaps
I can suggest this, although having a concrete proposal would probably carry more weight.
Why does this have to be in the hands of volunteers, such as myself and
I suspect because the Internet is decentralized.
How about adding security to the main agenda along-side with the .xxx TLD?
It is, although there are lots of aspects to security so undoubtedly, it can't be all things to all people. ICANN has an advisory committee specifically targeted at "security and stability" that has some folks who frequently participate on this list (http:// www.icann.org/committees/security/).
I have no problem with ICANN, but there is a long way to go before you can
I don't think ICANN claims this.
I'd encourage ICANN to take that road, much like I would encourage any person or organization that wants to help.
I don't think anyone expected ICANN to take on the role of Internet security czar. I suspect if ICANN tried to assert this sort of role, the USG (among other governments) would take strong exception. ICANN's role (as I understand it) is coordinative, not directive. Any attempt to go beyond this will result in ICANN getting slapped down.
What is ICANNs next step? I will support it, so will others. It's not
I don't think ICANN has ever claimed to run "the community".
Well, if a domain was registered last month, last week, or 2 hours ago,
As would I.
Who "one" is, now that is something to work out. We need help setting the
To be perfectly clear, I don't speak for ICANN, I just run IANA. I'm happy to forward suggestions to folks in ICANN who don't participate in NANOG or other forums, but don't expect this to have significantly more impact than you participating directly in the various ICANN forums.