New Bill on IANA Transition
This has just been reported to me (hat-tip to Steve Metalitz): The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority transition got a new legislative challenge in the House Wednesday via the Securing America’s Internet Domains Act (HR-5329). Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., bowed the bill, which would require NTIA to extend its existing contract with ICANN to administer the IANA functions through Sept. 30, 2019, unless the agency can certify it secured the U.S. government’s “sole ownership” of the .gov and .mil top-level domains. Greg
Hi, Two questions: - what are the chances that this becomes law - doesn't RFC1591 already take care of this? avri On 27-May-16 12:06, Greg Shatan wrote:
This has just been reported to me (hat-tip to Steve Metalitz):
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority transition got a new legislative challenge in the House Wednesday via the Securing America’s Internet Domains Act (HR-5329). Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., bowed the bill, which would require NTIA to extend its existing contract with ICANN to administer the IANA functions through Sept. 30, 2019, unless the agency can certify it secured the U.S. government’s “sole ownership” of the .gov and .mil top-level domains.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
The chances of this bill becoming law are close to zero, unless it is attached to a larger "must pass" bill or added as a rider to an appropriations measure. I'm not sure that the concept of "ownership" is a good fit for a TLD, but that language could always be modified to something along the lines of "permanent control". Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of avri doria Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:28 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New Bill on IANA Transition Hi, Two questions: - what are the chances that this becomes law - doesn't RFC1591 already take care of this? avri On 27-May-16 12:06, Greg Shatan wrote:
This has just been reported to me (hat-tip to Steve Metalitz):
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority transition got a new legislative challenge in the House Wednesday via the Securing America's Internet Domains Act (HR-5329). Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., bowed the bill, which would require NTIA to extend its existing contract with ICANN to administer the IANA functions through Sept. 30, 2019, unless the agency can certify it secured the U.S. government's "sole ownership" of the .gov and .mil top-level domains.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4568/12262 - Release Date: 05/19/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
So, that means nobody has ANY idea of it chanes of this going through, and the issue or property remains unsettled. Neve rmind that the level of ignorance displayed is staggering (the reference to RFC1591). greetings, el On 2016-05-27 17:51 , Phil Corwin wrote:
The chances of this bill becoming law are close to zero, unless it is attached to a larger "must pass" bill or added as a rider to an appropriations measure.
I'm not sure that the concept of "ownership" is a good fit for a TLD, but that language could always be modified to something along the lines of "permanent control".
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal [...] -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of avri doria Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:28 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New Bill on IANA Transition
Hi,
Two questions:
- what are the chances that this becomes law
- doesn't RFC1591 already take care of this?
avri [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/
The Weinstein appeal will give a strong indicator on whether the rights to .MIL and .GOV are a form of property. What must be really worrying from the right-wing in the USA is that (unless I'm mistaken) there's no carve out from ICANN (claimed) authority over .MIL/GOV as being any different from .COM/NET It's just that ICANN's left the legacy gTLDs alone these last 15 years. But a different ICANN, in a different juridsiction might, er, think differently. On 27/05/16 18:07, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
So,
that means nobody has ANY idea of it chanes of this going through, and the issue or property remains unsettled.
Neve rmind that the level of ignorance displayed is staggering (the reference to RFC1591).nd .
greetings, el
On 2016-05-27 17:51 , Phil Corwin wrote:
The chances of this bill becoming law are close to zero, unless it is attached to a larger "must pass" bill or added as a rider to an appropriations measure.
I'm not sure that the concept of "ownership" is a good fit for a TLD, but that language could always be modified to something along the lines of "permanent control".
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal [...] -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of avri doria Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:28 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New Bill on IANA Transition
Hi,
Two questions:
- what are the chances that this becomes law
- doesn't RFC1591 already take care of this?
avri [...]
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 07:35:20PM +0100, Nigel Roberts wrote:
What must be really worrying from the right-wing in the USA is that (unless I'm mistaken) there's no carve out from ICANN (claimed) authority over .MIL/GOV as being any different from .COM/NET
ICANN has exactly the same effective authority over any TLD as over any other: it controls the delegation from the root. That's it. It seems to me that an agreement between ICANN and the relevant USG departments that these are going to be treated effectively as ccTLDs (the way that the "IDN" ccTLDs are) would completely cover the matter. It also seems to me that the reason ICANN hasn't pressed on that has nothing to do with ICANN, and everything to do with a national government that didn't see a reason to have what Steve DelBianco called "more paper" last Tuesday. This is a completely artificial problem. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
participants (6)
-
Andrew Sullivan -
avri doria -
Dr Eberhard W Lisse -
Greg Shatan -
Nigel Roberts -
Phil Corwin