300 million people have spoken with one voice "WE DON'T NEED ICANN"
When I see ICANN supporters introduce the misguided argument on the "REAL" root I know were making progress. So - who here can see the Chinese National TLD system? Who can surf to Peking University at its official web site address used extensively in china http://北京大学.中国/ <http://xn--1lq90ic7fzpc.xn--fiqs8s/> The above URL works for me. Is there any other person here on the governance or atlarge lists who can surf to that working URL? I very proud of the Chines government. They took charge of their internet. They made it their business to understand the technology. While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger. Thats three hundred million fingers people. The TLD system in China was established as far back as 2003 with the assistance of i-dns - which also runs a root seen in most of Asia and developed a good portion of the tecnology used for IDN. ICANN had nothing to do with it. ICANN is a fools paradise. No one is happy with ICANN. I recommend governments don't end up dependent on ICANN. If you want secure infrastructure - NATIONALIZE YOUR ROOT. Create your own TLD infrastructure that owes no allegiance to ICANN or the U.S. government. That was my advice to the DOC. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2009/dnstransition/060.pdf If its good for China and America - it's good for you countries people too. regards joe baptista -- Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 Personal: www.joebaptista.wordpress.com
Joe Baptista wrote:
When I see ICANN supporters introduce the misguided argument on the "REAL" root I know were making progress.
Not everyone here is an ICANN "supporter". We're here to help it do the right thing, which in some cases means a 80-degree course change from current direction.
So - who here can see the Chinese National TLD system? Who can surf to Peking University at its official web site address used extensively in china
I can't. But tell me the IP addresses of the Chinese root servers and I probably can. There are also some alternative DNS systems which claim to resolve both the conventional ICANN domains as well as the Chinese on *and* OpenNIC: The only one I could find easily was the http://www.cesidianroot.net/ whose origins and purpose I can't at all understand by reading the site. All I know is that they support TLDs for (amongst others): .ili (Independent Long Island) and .geek
I very proud of the Chines government. They took charge of their internet. They made it their business to understand the technology. ... so they could use it to limit domestic access to the outside world. I guess one's level of pride is based on how one views how the mastery of technology has been used (or abused, as the case may be).
While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger. Thats three hundred million fingers people.
Despite protestations to the contrary, It's highly unlikely that so many people speak with the same voice. Or that so many people know or care about the issue.
ICANN is a fools paradise. No one is happy with ICANN. I wouldn't say "no one". Many service providers and registries have done very well with it, not to mention an entire industry of lobbyists, IP lawyers, contractors and other interests who have built careers or businesses through their interaction with ICANN. It's quite a tidy little money-printing machine if you're well placed. Of course, such reality does not deter one from the challenge of making ICANN more responsive to internet consumers.
I recommend governments don't end up dependent on ICANN. If you want secure infrastructure - NATIONALIZE YOUR ROOT. Create your own TLD infrastructure
Not until there's a protocol to resolve when two countries (or two root server operators) have/want the same TLD going to different locations. Even ICANN's status quo is better than the chaos that would create. Having said that, a transition of ICANN from a JPA-bound US entity to an agency that enables/enforces a formal international treaty is not the worst idea I've heard. - Evan
Hello, my attention is focussed on two statements below and wish to intervene as follows (by the way, I am addressing us all not a particular grouping):I very proud of the Chines government. They took charge of their internet.
They made it their business to understand the technology. ... so they could use it to limit domestic access to the outside world. I guess one's level of pride is based on how one views how the mastery of technology has been used (or abused, as the case may be).
The words "use" and "abuse" in the statement above triggers some negativity in perception that someone own the Internet and the ICANN process: tends to be politicking the Internet and polarizing the management of its spread by making use of a decision and sovereignty of a particular country. It would be constructive if we assumed neutrality (bitter as it can be) when we praise or complain about any developments. The named government has a large proportion of users in its interest and has done the best for them. Their domestic consumption of Internet service surpasses many; in that case, pointing a finger at any Body or making the China a case to amplify issues that may not be fair. it is better to look for another conducive and positive entry pion to address issues of common concern since the Internet phenomena is evolving very fast and it is at a major transient stage.
"While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger. Thats three hundred million fingers people." How constructive and encouraging would this statement be? It is a bold judgement of the situation. does it reflect or consider the glkobal picture? There are incoming Countries either from conflict or other issues and there are others entering crisis stages: How accommodating is this open statement? Perceptions differ and being constructive-neutral i would expect a statement portraying how ICANN could be made the supreme Body and accountable to the Community not only to the spheres of particular interests: each stakeholder be it a Sovereign nation/ state have their own interests. These interests could be political, economic, priority or pride they have the right to defend and promote them. The question is how to effect it without causing instability as witnessed in such statements. Bureaucracy is a term which does not go....any suggestion would make the debate more comfortable while promoting the development of equitable Internet phenomenon..ICANN Sydney next week? My small input Yassin Mshana
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:07:00 -0400 From: evan@telly.org To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org CC: governance@lists.cpsr.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] 300 million people have spoken with one voice "WE DON'T NEED ICANN"
Joe Baptista wrote:
When I see ICANN supporters introduce the misguided argument on the "REAL" root I know were making progress.
Not everyone here is an ICANN "supporter". We're here to help it do the right thing, which in some cases means a 80-degree course change from current direction.
So - who here can see the Chinese National TLD system? Who can surf to Peking University at its official web site address used extensively in china
I can't. But tell me the IP addresses of the Chinese root servers and I probably can.
There are also some alternative DNS systems which claim to resolve both the conventional ICANN domains as well as the Chinese on *and* OpenNIC:
The only one I could find easily was the http://www.cesidianroot.net/ whose origins and purpose I can't at all understand by reading the site. All I know is that they support TLDs for (amongst others): .ili (Independent Long Island) and .geek
I very proud of the Chines government. They took charge of their internet. They made it their business to understand the technology. ... so they could use it to limit domestic access to the outside world. I guess one's level of pride is based on how one views how the mastery of technology has been used (or abused, as the case may be).
While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger. Thats three hundred million fingers people.
Despite protestations to the contrary, It's highly unlikely that so many people speak with the same voice. Or that so many people know or care about the issue.
ICANN is a fools paradise. No one is happy with ICANN. I wouldn't say "no one". Many service providers and registries have done very well with it, not to mention an entire industry of lobbyists, IP lawyers, contractors and other interests who have built careers or businesses through their interaction with ICANN. It's quite a tidy little money-printing machine if you're well placed. Of course, such reality does not deter one from the challenge of making ICANN more responsive to internet consumers.
I recommend governments don't end up dependent on ICANN. If you want secure infrastructure - NATIONALIZE YOUR ROOT. Create your own TLD infrastructure
Not until there's a protocol to resolve when two countries (or two root server operators) have/want the same TLD going to different locations. Even ICANN's status quo is better than the chaos that would create. Having said that, a transition of ICANN from a JPA-bound US entity to an agency that enables/enforces a formal international treaty is not the worst idea I've heard.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_________________________________________________________________ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&...
My attention was drawn by the statement below:"I very proud of the Chines government. They took charge of their internet. They made it their business to understand the technology. While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger. Thats three hundred million fingers people."It seems to me that there a need to realign individual beliefs in the roles and responsibilities of each party before we move forward. China can and has the right to do whatever deem good to China. That is the natural right each individual entity has and should be respected. There are lessons to be learnt from what China has done (applause!!) to further develop the global facility in the form of the Internet. China has to outreach its massive population and that is what has happened. The notion that they want to side step is not a coinstructive one and tends to create an issue in our eyes. China has a GAC and member at the ICANN Board not for China only but for the Internet community (or was as far as I can remember) Finger pointing may sink the boat if all hands were to be on deck. One has to look further and in 360 degrees before pointing a finger (oops I am harsh here!) My few observations so far Yassin
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:29:37 -0400 From: baptista@publicroot.org To: governance@lists.cpsr.org; at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] 300 million people have spoken with one voice "WE DON'T NEED ICANN"
When I see ICANN supporters introduce the misguided argument on the "REAL" root I know were making progress.
So - who here can see the Chinese National TLD system? Who can surf to Peking University at its official web site address used extensively in china
http://北京大学.中国/ <http://xn--1lq90ic7fzpc.xn--fiqs8s/>
The above URL works for me. Is there any other person here on the governance or atlarge lists who can surf to that working URL?
I very proud of the Chines government. They took charge of their internet. They made it their business to understand the technology. While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger. Thats three hundred million fingers people.
The TLD system in China was established as far back as 2003 with the assistance of i-dns - which also runs a root seen in most of Asia and developed a good portion of the tecnology used for IDN. ICANN had nothing to do with it.
ICANN is a fools paradise. No one is happy with ICANN. I recommend governments don't end up dependent on ICANN. If you want secure infrastructure - NATIONALIZE YOUR ROOT. Create your own TLD infrastructure that owes no allegiance to ICANN or the U.S. government.
That was my advice to the DOC.
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2009/dnstransition/060.pdf
If its good for China and America - it's good for you countries people too.
regards joe baptista
-- Joe Baptista
www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
Personal: www.joebaptista.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out! http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_012009
participants (3)
-
Evan Leibovitch -
Joe Baptista -
Yassin Mshana