Questions to the board about distributed DNS
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope) Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"*? Kind regards, Justine On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," * Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> a écrit :
We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope)
Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"*?
Kind regards, Justine
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
Justine: Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/. Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video. -ed -ed On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," * Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name.
Friendly regards Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> a écrit :
We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope)
Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"*?
Kind regards, Justine
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Thank you Eduardo for sharing this useful record, a similar session have been presented during the Middle East DNS forum 2022 https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/8mbLwUflmBNDNS7bHPuj3jJxeKIE7n3mXX3--Kb1g4-z... Freindly Regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 3:24 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> a écrit :
Justine:
Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/.
Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video.
-ed
-ed
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG < cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," * Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name.
Friendly regards Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> a écrit :
We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope)
Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"*?
Kind regards, Justine
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Eduardo, Chokri, Thank you for your replies, which tells me what you are talking about exactly. I think the mention of use of blockchains in this context clouds the real issue - which is whether the existence of an alternate DNS to the one that ICANN "manages" threatens the core concept of one world one Internet. Justine ------ On Sat, 20 Aug 2022, 01:17 Chokri Ben Romdhane, <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you Eduardo for sharing this useful record, a similar session have been presented during the Middle East DNS forum 2022
https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/8mbLwUflmBNDNS7bHPuj3jJxeKIE7n3mXX3--Kb1g4-z...
Freindly Regards Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 3:24 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> a écrit :
Justine:
Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/.
Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video.
-ed
-ed
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG < cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," * Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name.
Friendly regards Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> a écrit :
We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope)
Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"*?
Kind regards, Justine
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
of course it does - just my personal opinion but there’s money to be made, so it’s going to happen r On 19.08.2022, at 21:39, Justine Chew via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Eduardo, Chokri, Thank you for your replies, which tells me what you are talking about exactly. I think the mention of use of blockchains in this context clouds the real issue - which is whether the existence of an alternate DNS to the one that ICANN "manages" threatens the core concept of one world one Internet. Justine ------ On Sat, 20 Aug 2022, 01:17 Chokri Ben Romdhane, <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> wrote: Thank you Eduardo for sharing this useful record, a similar session have been presented during the Middle East DNS forum 2022 https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/8mbLwUflmBNDNS7bHPuj3jJxeKIE7n3mXX3--Kb1g4-z... Freindly Regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 3:24 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com<mailto:eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com>> a écrit : Justine: Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/. Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video. -ed -ed On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com<mailto:justine.chew.icann@gmail.com>> a écrit : We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope) Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"? Kind regards, Justine On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Notice: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Justin, Thank again for interest Yes and No, the use of blockchain will probably decentralized the regulatation of DNS market without doubt which will be in conflict with the key concept of one world one internet, but in the other side the with blockchain DNS we are going to abandon the heaviest registry registrar model and will reinforce the security of DNS management at a low costs, which will make DNS more affordable and available. So globally there is some risks but also some opportunities. Freindly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 8:39 PM, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> a écrit :
Eduardo, Chokri,
Thank you for your replies, which tells me what you are talking about exactly.
I think the mention of use of blockchains in this context clouds the real issue - which is whether the existence of an alternate DNS to the one that ICANN "manages" threatens the core concept of one world one Internet.
Justine ------
On Sat, 20 Aug 2022, 01:17 Chokri Ben Romdhane, <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you Eduardo for sharing this useful record, a similar session have been presented during the Middle East DNS forum 2022
https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/8mbLwUflmBNDNS7bHPuj3jJxeKIE7n3mXX3--Kb1g4-z...
Freindly Regards Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 3:24 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> a écrit :
Justine:
Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/.
Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video.
-ed
-ed
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG < cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," * Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name.
Friendly regards Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew < justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> a écrit :
We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope)
Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"*?
Kind regards, Justine
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?* "
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Thank you Chokri Ben Romdhane and others with this discussion thread. Resilience is all about "Expecting the Unexpected" and banks on the high positives of decentralization and distributed systems. There are fortunately many technology options. One technology or one methodology will kill others is a specious argument in this space. We need to "mature" fast in exercising the options in the emerging complex system. The advances in technology has been so spectacular that I garner that a pair of "smart" spectacles can be configured into a DNS someday. So what the DNS does will be readily noted. Any perceived exaggeration in this statement may please be excused. Suggested Reference: OECD, "Building Resilience - NEW STRATEGIES FOR STRENGTHENING INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE AND MAINTENANCE", 2021 [ https://www.oecd.org/g20/topics/infrastructure/Building-Infrastructure-Resil... ] Building Resilience - OECD<https://www.oecd.org/g20/topics/infrastructure/Building-Infrastructure-Resil...> building resilience new strategies for strengthening infrastructure resilience and maintenance 1 www.oecd.org Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 20 August 2022 02:38 To: Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Justin, Thank again for interest Yes and No, the use of blockchain will probably decentralized the regulatation of DNS market without doubt which will be in conflict with the key concept of one world one internet, but in the other side the with blockchain DNS we are going to abandon the heaviest registry registrar model and will reinforce the security of DNS management at a low costs, which will make DNS more affordable and available. So globally there is some risks but also some opportunities. Freindly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 8:39 PM, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com<mailto:justine.chew.icann@gmail.com>> a écrit : Eduardo, Chokri, Thank you for your replies, which tells me what you are talking about exactly. I think the mention of use of blockchains in this context clouds the real issue - which is whether the existence of an alternate DNS to the one that ICANN "manages" threatens the core concept of one world one Internet. Justine ------ On Sat, 20 Aug 2022, 01:17 Chokri Ben Romdhane, <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> wrote: Thank you Eduardo for sharing this useful record, a similar session have been presented during the Middle East DNS forum 2022 https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/8mbLwUflmBNDNS7bHPuj3jJxeKIE7n3mXX3--Kb1g4-z... Freindly Regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 3:24 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com<mailto:eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com>> a écrit : Justine: Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/. Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video. -ed -ed On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com<mailto:justine.chew.icann@gmail.com>> a écrit : We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope) Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"? Kind regards, Justine On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Notice: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Dear All, It may be better to go back to the using the term "Heterogeneity" rather than mention any specific technology until a degree of maturity happens in making technology choices. Technology offers clear bounds on "Diversity" to make oneness of purpose feasible as "Heterogeneity". So many decades after the ISO - OSI Reference Model happened this is quite matured on Technology options. I am learning with thanks the unique "Multi - Stakeholder" model being pioneered by ICANN that is ushering in some nice managerial processes. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Justine Chew via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 20 August 2022 01:09 To: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com>; Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Eduardo, Chokri, Thank you for your replies, which tells me what you are talking about exactly. I think the mention of use of blockchains in this context clouds the real issue - which is whether the existence of an alternate DNS to the one that ICANN "manages" threatens the core concept of one world one Internet. Justine ------ On Sat, 20 Aug 2022, 01:17 Chokri Ben Romdhane, <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> wrote: Thank you Eduardo for sharing this useful record, a similar session have been presented during the Middle East DNS forum 2022 https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/8mbLwUflmBNDNS7bHPuj3jJxeKIE7n3mXX3--Kb1g4-z... Freindly Regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 3:24 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com<mailto:eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com>> a écrit : Justine: Encirca is selling domains in the blockchain - see https://www.encirca.com/blockchain/. Check the presentation that they gave NARALO about this theme: https://www.facebook.com/647891920/videos/2953461934799818/ . The presentation starts around 4 minutes into the video. -ed -ed On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:08 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Justine, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. To answer your question "Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs," Yes , I know some as I have mentioned in the question but it will be very hard to get exact data, and I think that it will be useful to suggest to ICANN to make a study about the accredit registrar whose selling Blockchain domain name. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com<mailto:justine.chew.icann@gmail.com>> a écrit : We need to examine available information such as: -Whether OCTO has or is looking to change its position from the relevant paper it published in April 2022 on this topic, in light of developments with blockchain etc etc -Whether SSAC has or is working on an opinion on the topic (outside of NCAP, for which alt DNS is out of scope) Do you have or can you collect some actual data to support your remark of "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs,"? Kind regards, Justine On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 17:08, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Notice: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Dear Chokri, thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards, Olivier On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Dear Olivier, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear Chokri,
thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote:
Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?* *If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Dear CPWG, Before engaging with other ACs or even the Board on this issue, I believe the ALAC should decide whether they believe Blockchain domains are even within ICANN’s scope/mission. There is a good argument to be made that the activities that occur with Blockchain domain names are not within ICANN’s mission. ICANN’s mission is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems….” Question: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique identifier systems”? The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws). It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all. For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains? But to assume that ICANN has any jurisdiction over the Blockchain domains or any ability to “regulate” them (if that is even possible) is something we need to examine as it pertains to the mission/scope of ICANN. Sincerely, Jeff [cid:image001.png@01D8B3B7.2B1D30B0] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 6:42 AM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Olivier, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> a écrit : Dear Chokri, thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards, Olivier On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Dear Jeff, On 19/08/2022 17:40, Jeff Neuman wrote:
The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws).
It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all.
For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains?
I think you say it yourself -- do blockchain domains represent a threat to the resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS? They do break the concept of an identifier system with a single Root, don't they? Kindest regards, Olivier
Dear Olivier, Correct. Examining how ICANN responds to a threat (if it is a threat) is appropriate for discussion. But that is different than having a discussion about the use of Blockchain domains or even the regulation of Blockchain. Therefore, asking the question about whether the Board encouraged registrars to sell Blockchain domains is not an appropriate question (in my opinion). However, asking whether the Board understands that the longer it takes to introduce the process for the next round, the more it is indirectly encouraging the proliferation of these Blockchain domains and the more problems there will be in the future with potential “collisions” of namespaces not associated with ICANN. [cid:image001.png@01D8B3C2.72C28E50] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 11:08 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Jeff, On 19/08/2022 17:40, Jeff Neuman wrote: The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws). It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all. For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains? I think you say it yourself -- do blockchain domains represent a threat to the resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS? They do break the concept of an identifier system with a single Root, don't they? Kindest regards, Olivier
Dear Jeff, I really appreciate your analyse of the question and indeed by delaying the discussion about the use of blockchain DNS we( community and the board ) are some how encouraging the proliferation of new type of name space collision which is in the scope of the mission ( or business to repeat the term used by Wolfgang) of ICANN. Freindly Regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 4:57 PM, Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> a écrit :
Dear Olivier,
Correct. Examining how ICANN responds to a threat (if it is a threat) is appropriate for discussion. But that is different than having a discussion about the use of Blockchain domains or even the regulation of Blockchain.
Therefore, asking the question about whether the Board encouraged registrars to sell Blockchain domains is not an appropriate question (in my opinion). However, asking whether the Board understands that the longer it takes to introduce the process for the next round, the more it is indirectly encouraging the proliferation of these Blockchain domains and the more problems there will be in the future with potential “collisions” of namespaces not associated with ICANN.
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
p: +1.202.549.5079
E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com
*From:* Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 11:08 AM *To:* Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Chokri Ben Romdhane < chokribr@gmail.com> *Cc:* CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS
Dear Jeff,
On 19/08/2022 17:40, Jeff Neuman wrote:
The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws).
It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all.
For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains?
I think you say it yourself -- do blockchain domains represent a threat to the resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS? They do break the concept of an identifier system with a single Root, don't they?
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:57 AM Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
However, asking whether the Board understands that the longer it takes to introduce the process for the next round, the more it is indirectly encouraging the proliferation of these Blockchain domains and the more problems there will be in the future with potential “collisions” of namespaces not associated with ICANN.
Hey there, ICANN. Nice little DNS business you got going. Now listen here ... if you don't give us a new shitload of TLDs to peddle we're gonna go off and create our own DNS so we can invent them ourselves. Not only that, but we're gonna use current buzzwords to sell our new stuff. What's the buzzword all those Tiktok influencers are flogging? Yeah, Bitcoin! That one! Maybe we'll sell the subdomains as NFTs!! Then you'll REALLY be sorry when we start making our TLDs the same as yours! But hey, we're reasonable people. Just send the TLDs we're demanding in an unmarked envelope to our PO box in the Caymans. And then you won't have to worry your little heads... Until the next time we want some more.
🤣 r. On 25.08.2022, at 07:25, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:57 AM Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: However, asking whether the Board understands that the longer it takes to introduce the process for the next round, the more it is indirectly encouraging the proliferation of these Blockchain domains and the more problems there will be in the future with potential “collisions” of namespaces not associated with ICANN. Hey there, ICANN. Nice little DNS business you got going. Now listen here ... if you don't give us a new shitload of TLDs to peddle we're gonna go off and create our own DNS so we can invent them ourselves. Not only that, but we're gonna use current buzzwords to sell our new stuff. What's the buzzword all those Tiktok influencers are flogging? Yeah, Bitcoin! That one! Maybe we'll sell the subdomains as NFTs!! Then you'll REALLY be sorry when we start making our TLDs the same as yours! But hey, we're reasonable people. Just send the TLDs we're demanding in an unmarked envelope to our PO box in the Caymans. And then you won't have to worry your little heads... Until the next time we want some more. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
And this twisting of words is one of the problems of the ICANN community that takes it for granted that just because these movements failed in the past, they are doomed to fail in the future. Like you Evan I too initially had that position. After all, no one was more was heavily involved in the alternate root debate / ICP-3 back in 2000/2001 when we had to litigate against the then-called Atlantic Root who sued Neustar and ICANN when we were awarded .biz. Then came "Real Names" and other versions. However, the real reason why those other movements failed had nothing to do with ICANN, but had everything to do with the browsers and other applications that did not recognize these alternate roots without a plug-in / third party software to make them work. In a way this does support your argument that ICANN should just ignore the Blockchain domains because ICANN's involvement or lack thereof is irrelevant to the success or not of the Blockchain domains. However, this is a superficial view and ignores the question about why these alternate roots keep popping up and what makes Blockchain domains so different than previous alt roots. And I believe it is a combination of factors. 1. Traditional DNS / Domain Names are now 40-50 year old technology that while scalable up to a point does have its limitations. 2. The ICANN environment which is so incredibly slow has a tough time (if not makes it impossible) for new technology to be integrated into the domain name system. What do I mean? * Every time in the past 22 years when a registry wants to introduce new functionality or technology into the system, ICANN (community and Org) do everything in its power to delay or water down its emergency. I am not saying it tries to intentionally sabotage new innovation, but through its incredibly beaurocratic and complex processes requests for truly new services grind to a halt. * When new technologies want to be introduced, incumbent players in the industry that may be negatively impacted by the new technology do their best to ensure that such new technology is either rejected outright or is caught up in so much delay and process that time and other new technologies make the original request no longer relevant. The first example I witnessed of this was the application for .geo in 2000 which was not accepted by ICANN. The two reasons given by the Board was (1) we dont understand the technology behind the proposal and (2) Since Neustar was the registry back-end (the most insignificant part of the .geo proposal), and they already got .biz, we dont want them involved in another TLD. NOTE: the reality is that SRI was the applicant and essentially had planned to roll out a system much like Google Earth (only a decade earlier). This scenario has repeated time and time again, including when the .hiphop registry was being assigned from its former registry to where it is now. That assignment (which normally takes less than 90 days), took 9 months because of the mention of the words Blockchain and NFT. Just take a look at the history of RSEP requests and you can find a number of examples of services that were proposed and delayed which eventually either were withdrawn (because of the headache of the process), or were watered down. The point is that some of the drawbacks of the multi stakeholder model are that (a) everyone has to have their say regardless of whether they are impacted or not, (b) if the org or the community doesn't understand a proposal (or the proposal may negatively impact their commercial interests) it pushes back hard to the point where delay is beneficial, and (c) the model is to slow to react to what is truly going on around them. Eventually, this will lead to many working around the system. They may fail over and over again, but there is always a breaking point. Is that here and now? We dont know, but we cant turn a blind eye towards it. Just some food for thought. Sincerely, Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com ________________________________ From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2022 1:26 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> Cc: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:57 AM Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: However, asking whether the Board understands that the longer it takes to introduce the process for the next round, the more it is indirectly encouraging the proliferation of these Blockchain domains and the more problems there will be in the future with potential “collisions” of namespaces not associated with ICANN. Hey there, ICANN. Nice little DNS business you got going. Now listen here ... if you don't give us a new shitload of TLDs to peddle we're gonna go off and create our own DNS so we can invent them ourselves. Not only that, but we're gonna use current buzzwords to sell our new stuff. What's the buzzword all those Tiktok influencers are flogging? Yeah, Bitcoin! That one! Maybe we'll sell the subdomains as NFTs!! Then you'll REALLY be sorry when we start making our TLDs the same as yours! But hey, we're reasonable people. Just send the TLDs we're demanding in an unmarked envelope to our PO box in the Caymans. And then you won't have to worry your little heads... Until the next time we want some more.
Interesting stuff. On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 8:52 AM Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
And this twisting of words is one of the problems of the ICANN community that takes it for granted that just because these movements failed in the past, they are doomed to fail in the future.
Like you Evan I too initially had that position. After all, no one was more was heavily involved in the alternate root debate / ICP-3 back in 2000/2001 when we had to litigate against the then-called Atlantic Root who sued Neustar and ICANN when we were awarded .biz. Then came "Real Names" and other versions.
However, the real reason why those other movements failed had nothing to do with ICANN, but had everything to do with the browsers and other applications that did not recognize these alternate roots without a plug-in / third party software to make them work. In a way this does support your argument that ICANN should just ignore the Blockchain domains because ICANN's involvement or lack thereof is irrelevant to the success or not of the Blockchain domains.
However, this is a superficial view and ignores the question about why these alternate roots keep popping up and what makes Blockchain domains so different than previous alt roots. And I believe it is a combination of factors.
1. Traditional DNS / Domain Names are now 40-50 year old technology that while scalable up to a point does have its limitations. 2. The ICANN environment which is so incredibly slow has a tough time (if not makes it impossible) for new technology to be integrated into the domain name system. What do I mean? 1. Every time in the past 22 years when a registry wants to introduce new functionality or technology into the system, ICANN (community and Org) do everything in its power to delay or water down its emergency. I am not saying it tries to intentionally sabotage new innovation, but through its incredibly beaurocratic and complex processes requests for truly new services grind to a halt. 2. When new technologies want to be introduced, incumbent players in the industry that may be negatively impacted by the new technology do their best to ensure that such new technology is either rejected outright or is caught up in so much delay and process that time and other new technologies make the original request no longer relevant. The first example I witnessed of this was the application for .geo in 2000 which was not accepted by ICANN. The two reasons given by the Board was (1) we dont understand the technology behind the proposal and (2) Since Neustar was the registry back-end (the most insignificant part of the .geo proposal), and they already got .biz, we dont want them involved in another TLD. NOTE: the reality is that SRI was the applicant and essentially had planned to roll out a system much like Google Earth (only a decade earlier). This scenario has repeated time and time again, including when the .hiphop registry was being assigned from its former registry to where it is now. That assignment (which normally takes less than 90 days), took 9 months because of the mention of the words Blockchain and NFT. Just take a look at the history of RSEP requests and you can find a number of examples of services that were proposed and delayed which eventually either were withdrawn (because of the headache of the process), or were watered down.
The point is that some of the drawbacks of the multi stakeholder model are that (a) everyone has to have their say regardless of whether they are impacted or not, (b) if the org or the community doesn't understand a proposal (or the proposal may negatively impact their commercial interests) it pushes back hard to the point where delay is beneficial, and (c) the model is to slow to react to what is truly going on around them.
Eventually, this will lead to many working around the system. They may fail over and over again, but there is always a breaking point. Is that here and now? We dont know, but we cant turn a blind eye towards it.
Just some food for thought.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com
------------------------------ *From:* Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> *Sent:* Thursday, August 25, 2022 1:26 AM *To:* Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> *Cc:* Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Chokri Ben Romdhane < chokribr@gmail.com>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:57 AM Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
However, asking whether the Board understands that the longer it takes to introduce the process for the next round, the more it is indirectly encouraging the proliferation of these Blockchain domains and the more problems there will be in the future with potential “collisions” of namespaces not associated with ICANN.
Hey there, ICANN. Nice little DNS business you got going. Now listen here ... if you don't give us a new shitload of TLDs to peddle we're gonna go off and create our own DNS so we can invent them ourselves. Not only that, but we're gonna use current buzzwords to sell our new stuff. What's the buzzword all those Tiktok influencers are flogging? Yeah, Bitcoin! That one! Maybe we'll sell the subdomains as NFTs!! Then you'll REALLY be sorry when we start making our TLDs the same as yours! But hey, we're reasonable people. Just send the TLDs we're demanding in an unmarked envelope to our PO box in the Caymans. And then you won't have to worry your little heads... Until the next time we want some more.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
This is getting really tired. And tiring. this is a superficial view and ignores the question about why these
alternate roots keep popping up and what makes Blockchain domains so different than previous alt roots. And I believe it is a combination of factors.
TL; DR: ICANN manages a resource that has proven valuable to some to exploit commercially. Said exploiters don't like the pace and/or limitations of ICANN's provision of said resource, so from time to time they try to subvert ICANN and make their own. Eventually one of them may succeed. Therefore, ICANN must do more to accommodate the needs of the exploiters so that they don't try again. As they said in previous generations, balderdash. The new-fangled domains are different in neither purpose nor motivation, much as their hucksters protest otherwise. This time it's DIFFERENT! But rather than the quote about insanity incorrectly attributed to Einstein, here one is reminded of an old cartoon segment <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc4IFIXcDcs>. Anyone taking even a cursory view of the Internet can see that there are numerous ways that end-users employ to find what they want on the Internet. The real innovation comes not from those who seek to re-invent the implementation of "memorable domain names", but totally circumvent it. Search engines, QR codes, social media pages, all of these have been used to connect people to their Internet destinations. And while they inevitably flow through the DNS, they can easily use non-human-readable domains that could be handled within a single TLD. In other words, innovative work-arounds are already happening. Just not the way the DNS exploiters would like. Funny how the browsers that were such obstacles to alternate roots, had no problems combining search and URL queries into a single entry field. If you want "Joe's Pizza" near you, you don't have to guess at which domain you need if search engines are location-aware. And when COVID came, when Joe's Pizza wanted to put their menus online they used QR codes, not URLs. What is so pathetic about the DNS wannabes, past and present, is that they're at their core never more than poor counterfeits and always will be, buzzwords notwithstanding. As poor as ICANN's processes may be -- and they certainly are -- a would-be replacement that is exploiter-driven will never be an improvement to anyone but the exploiters. Coincidentally, the successful alternatives are the ones that have eliminated the role of the DNS exploiters -- so successful, indeed, that these alternatives have come into gatekeeper problems of their own. But that is a discussion for another day (and probably another venue). Cheers, - Evan
Thanks Olivier - and everyone who haas added to this discussion - plus the useful links to RALO presentations. Yes, this is - or should be - of interest to ICANN and a subject to discussion. I”d be particularly interested from both SSAC - their opinion - as well as PTI. Could this be on the CPWG agenda for dissuasion? Holly
On Aug 20, 2022, at 1:08 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jeff,
On 19/08/2022 17:40, Jeff Neuman wrote:
The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws).
It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all.
For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains?
I think you say it yourself -- do blockchain domains represent a threat to the resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS? They do break the concept of an identifier system with a single Root, don't they?
Kindest regards,
Olivier _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
The core of the question seems to be this: Is ICANN's remit just to administer the DNS? Or is the DNS merely the tool that ICANN uses, for the moment, to administer domain names -- domain names being our remit? If the former, then Blockchain Domains are out of ICANN's scope. If the latter, they are in scope. From this all else follows. Bill Jouris Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:08 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG<cpwg@icann.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Bill: *"ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the private, non-government, nonprofit corporation with responsibility for Internet Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system (DNS) management, and root server system management functions." *** So, for ICANN, the corporation, blockchain is out of scope. However, ICANN community members should know what's happening outside the ICANN bubble regarding blockchain and its probable (or unprobable) intersections with the DNS. -ed **: https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/ICANN-Internet-Corporation-for-... On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:00 PM Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
The core of the question seems to be this: Is ICANN's remit just to administer the DNS? Or is the DNS merely the tool that ICANN uses, for the moment, to administer domain names -- domain names being our remit?
If the former, then Blockchain Domains are out of ICANN's scope. If the latter, they are in scope. From this all else follows.
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:08 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
+1 Eduardo. Out of scope, but ALAC should keep an eye on it in case there are any issues that affect end-users. Most likely any potential conflicts and collisions will either never materialize or be out of sight of Internet users. This IMO should be the extent of our involvement in this issue. To go beyond this is to amplify the fear-mongering that exploiters seek in order to pressure ICANN to get their way. - Evan On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:21 PM Eduardo Diaz via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Bill:
*"ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the private, non-government, nonprofit corporation with responsibility for Internet Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system (DNS) management, and root server system management functions." ***
So, for ICANN, the corporation, blockchain is out of scope. However, ICANN community members should know what's happening outside the ICANN bubble regarding blockchain and its probable (or unprobable) intersections with the DNS. -ed **: https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/ICANN-Internet-Corporation-for-...
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:00 PM Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
The core of the question seems to be this: Is ICANN's remit just to administer the DNS? Or is the DNS merely the tool that ICANN uses, for the moment, to administer domain names -- domain names being our remit?
If the former, then Blockchain Domains are out of ICANN's scope. If the latter, they are in scope. From this all else follows.
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:08 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Evan and Edouardo, "Out of scope, but ALAC should keep an eye on it in case there are any issues that affect end-users." Yes community(At large, ALAC.. ) should keep an eye on the evolution of alternate DNS but using which mecanismes or under which program if it's out of scope of ICANN (Same Issue with DNS abuse, and potentially with IDN variants)? Friendly Regards Chokri Le ven. 26 août 2022 à 00:07, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> a écrit :
+1 Eduardo.
Out of scope, but ALAC should keep an eye on it in case there are any issues that affect end-users. Most likely any potential conflicts and collisions will either never materialize or be out of sight of Internet users.
This IMO should be the extent of our involvement in this issue. To go beyond this is to amplify the fear-mongering that exploiters seek in order to pressure ICANN to get their way.
- Evan
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:21 PM Eduardo Diaz via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Bill:
*"ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the private, non-government, nonprofit corporation with responsibility for Internet Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system (DNS) management, and root server system management functions." ***
So, for ICANN, the corporation, blockchain is out of scope. However, ICANN community members should know what's happening outside the ICANN bubble regarding blockchain and its probable (or unprobable) intersections with the DNS. -ed **: https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/ICANN-Internet-Corporation-for-...
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:00 PM Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
The core of the question seems to be this: Is ICANN's remit just to administer the DNS? Or is the DNS merely the tool that ICANN uses, for the moment, to administer domain names -- domain names being our remit?
If the former, then Blockchain Domains are out of ICANN's scope. If the latter, they are in scope. From this all else follows.
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:08 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Chokri, ALAC has a fairly broad scope regarding such mechanisms, and they need not be complex. It is tasked with advising ICANN on any issue related to its activities that may impact end-users. Easiest is to task a person or group with monitoring the blockchain-domain environment and reporting to ALAC if anything is happening that might affect ICANN and end-users (even if the source of that impact is beyond ICANN's control). Such a report would be considered -- probably here at the CPWG -- and possibly developed into formal ALAC advice that could be sent to the Board. There are other paths, but the above would probably be most efficient regarding volunteer time required. Cheers, Evan On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 6:48 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Evan and Edouardo,
"Out of scope, but ALAC should keep an eye on it in case there are any issues that affect end-users."
Yes community(At large, ALAC.. ) should keep an eye on the evolution of alternate DNS but using which mecanismes or under which program if it's out of scope of ICANN (Same Issue with DNS abuse, and potentially with IDN variants)?
Friendly Regards Chokri
Le ven. 26 août 2022 à 00:07, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> a écrit :
+1 Eduardo.
Out of scope, but ALAC should keep an eye on it in case there are any issues that affect end-users. Most likely any potential conflicts and collisions will either never materialize or be out of sight of Internet users.
This IMO should be the extent of our involvement in this issue. To go beyond this is to amplify the fear-mongering that exploiters seek in order to pressure ICANN to get their way.
- Evan
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:21 PM Eduardo Diaz via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Bill:
*"ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the private, non-government, nonprofit corporation with responsibility for Internet Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system (DNS) management, and root server system management functions." ***
So, for ICANN, the corporation, blockchain is out of scope. However, ICANN community members should know what's happening outside the ICANN bubble regarding blockchain and its probable (or unprobable) intersections with the DNS. -ed **: https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/ICANN-Internet-Corporation-for-...
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 6:00 PM Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
The core of the question seems to be this: Is ICANN's remit just to administer the DNS? Or is the DNS merely the tool that ICANN uses, for the moment, to administer domain names -- domain names being our remit?
If the former, then Blockchain Domains are out of ICANN's scope. If the latter, they are in scope. From this all else follows.
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:08 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Somebody with more patience than I might be able to find links to materials ICANN used at the IGF in Geneva a few years back. One of their technical team gave a very good presentation about “alternate identifiers”, which was very helpful. There definitely is the potential for confusion between “real” domains that actually resolve on the public internet and ones that don’t. I’m also having flashbacks to “new net” or whatever it was called from the 90s Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 19 August 2022 at 15:40 To: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear CPWG, Before engaging with other ACs or even the Board on this issue, I believe the ALAC should decide whether they believe Blockchain domains are even within ICANN’s scope/mission. There is a good argument to be made that the activities that occur with Blockchain domain names are not within ICANN’s mission. ICANN’s mission is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems….” Question: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique identifier systems”? The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws). It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all. For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains? But to assume that ICANN has any jurisdiction over the Blockchain domains or any ability to “regulate” them (if that is even possible) is something we need to examine as it pertains to the mission/scope of ICANN. Sincerely, Jeff [cid:image001.png@01D8B3B7.2B1D30B0] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 6:42 AM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Olivier, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> a écrit : Dear Chokri, thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards, Olivier On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Hi Michele, Do you mean this session https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2018-ws-408-dns-enhance... . Freindly regards Chokri Le mer. 24 août 2022 à 4:56 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight < michele@blacknight.com> a écrit :
Somebody with more patience than I might be able to find links to materials ICANN used at the IGF in Geneva a few years back. One of their technical team gave a very good presentation about “alternate identifiers”, which was very helpful.
There definitely is the potential for confusion between “real” domains that actually resolve on the public internet and ones that don’t.
I’m also having flashbacks to “new net” or whatever it was called from the 90s
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
*From: *CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG < cpwg@icann.org> *Date: *Friday, 19 August 2022 at 15:40 *To: *Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject: *[CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS
*[EXTERNAL EMAIL]* Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources.
Dear CPWG,
Before engaging with other ACs or even the Board on this issue, I believe the ALAC should decide whether they believe Blockchain domains are even within ICANN’s scope/mission. There is a good argument to be made that the activities that occur with Blockchain domain names are not within ICANN’s mission.
ICANN’s mission is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems….”
*Question*: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique identifier systems”?
The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws).
It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all.
For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains?
But to assume that ICANN has any jurisdiction over the Blockchain domains or any ability to “regulate” them (if that is even possible) is something we need to examine as it pertains to the mission/scope of ICANN.
Sincerely,
Jeff
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
p: +1.202.549.5079
E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com
*From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG *Sent:* Friday, August 19, 2022 6:42 AM *To:* Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc:* CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS
Dear Olivier,
Thank you for your time and interest in this topic.
I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage.
Friendly regards
Chokri
Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear Chokri,
thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote:
Dear friends,
I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS
"*Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities?*
*If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?*"
If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic.
Thank you again for your interest in this topic.
Friendly regards
Chokri
--
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
No – it was from the 2017 IGF, but I can’t find it online annoyingly ☹ It was a presentation by Alain Durand – there were also some panel sessions on similar topics at the same event -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 25 August 2022 at 18:33 To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Cc: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Hi Michele, Do you mean this session https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2018-ws-408-dns-enhance.... Freindly regards Chokri Le mer. 24 août 2022 à 4:56 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> a écrit : Somebody with more patience than I might be able to find links to materials ICANN used at the IGF in Geneva a few years back. One of their technical team gave a very good presentation about “alternate identifiers”, which was very helpful. There definitely is the potential for confusion between “real” domains that actually resolve on the public internet and ones that don’t. I’m also having flashbacks to “new net” or whatever it was called from the 90s Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, 19 August 2022 at 15:40 To: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear CPWG, Before engaging with other ACs or even the Board on this issue, I believe the ALAC should decide whether they believe Blockchain domains are even within ICANN’s scope/mission. There is a good argument to be made that the activities that occur with Blockchain domain names are not within ICANN’s mission. ICANN’s mission is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems….” Question: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique identifier systems”? The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws). It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all. For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains? But to assume that ICANN has any jurisdiction over the Blockchain domains or any ability to “regulate” them (if that is even possible) is something we need to examine as it pertains to the mission/scope of ICANN. Sincerely, Jeff [cid:image001.png@01D8B3B7.2B1D30B0] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 6:42 AM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Olivier, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> a écrit : Dear Chokri, thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards, Olivier On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Hi Michele All what I have found is the real-time captioning of the session: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2017-day-0-salle-2-the-.... Searching for “Durand” will get you to his presentation. Maybe we can ask him directly about more material/information? The overarching question I have - off-topic, though - is whether the incredible rise in cost of energy will have an effect on further development and deployment of blockchain technologies, since this looks like using an inordinate amount of power. Cheers, Roberto On 26.08.2022, at 14:13, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: No – it was from the 2017 IGF, but I can’t find it online annoyingly ☹ It was a presentation by Alain Durand – there were also some panel sessions on similar topics at the same event -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday, 25 August 2022 at 18:33 To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> Cc: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>>, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Hi Michele, Do you mean this session https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2018-ws-408-dns-enhance.... Freindly regards Chokri Le mer. 24 août 2022 à 4:56 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> a écrit : Somebody with more patience than I might be able to find links to materials ICANN used at the IGF in Geneva a few years back. One of their technical team gave a very good presentation about “alternate identifiers”, which was very helpful. There definitely is the potential for confusion between “real” domains that actually resolve on the public internet and ones that don’t. I’m also having flashbacks to “new net” or whatever it was called from the 90s Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, 19 August 2022 at 15:40 To: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear CPWG, Before engaging with other ACs or even the Board on this issue, I believe the ALAC should decide whether they believe Blockchain domains are even within ICANN’s scope/mission. There is a good argument to be made that the activities that occur with Blockchain domain names are not within ICANN’s mission. ICANN’s mission is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems….” Question: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique identifier systems”? The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws). It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all. For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains? But to assume that ICANN has any jurisdiction over the Blockchain domains or any ability to “regulate” them (if that is even possible) is something we need to examine as it pertains to the mission/scope of ICANN. Sincerely, Jeff [cid:image001.png@01D8B3B7.2B1D30B0] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com<http://jjnsolutions.com/> From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 6:42 AM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Olivier, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> a écrit : Dear Chokri, thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards, Olivier On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Roberto,
The overarching question I have - off-topic, though - is whether the incredible rise in cost of energy will have an effect on further development and deployment of blockchain technologies, since this looks like using an inordinate amount of power.
IMO the use of blockchain in this particular effort serves two possible purposes: - Attracting suckers investors and potential customers with today's tech buzzword-du-jour - Enabling the proclamation of "what makes Blockchain domains so different than previous alt roots" for the purposes of threatening ICANN and its community Whether its business model is either financially or environmentally sustainable is besides the point. Cheers, - Evan
Dear Friends, A useful article about DNS Service Model Based on Permissioned Blockchain The authors of this article propose a model to: Avoid DNS Collison and to manage DNS chain using combining cctld and gtld servers. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348330406_DNS_Service_Model_Based_o... @Evan please note that with Blockchain DNS Model registry registrar registrant is not always respected, sometimes there is a confusion between registrant customer and end user, but you are right I made a mistake by confusing those actors. friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 26 août 2022 à 17:49, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> a écrit :
Hi Roberto,
The overarching question I have - off-topic, though - is whether the incredible rise in cost of energy will have an effect on further development and deployment of blockchain technologies, since this looks like using an inordinate amount of power.
IMO the use of blockchain in this particular effort serves two possible purposes:
- Attracting suckers investors and potential customers with today's tech buzzword-du-jour - Enabling the proclamation of "what makes Blockchain domains so different than previous alt roots" for the purposes of threatening ICANN and its community
Whether its business model is either financially or environmentally sustainable is besides the point.
Cheers, - Evan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 6:51 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: A useful article about DNS Service Model Based on Permissioned Blockchain
The authors of this article propose a model to: Avoid DNS Collison and to manage DNS chain using combining cctld and gtld servers.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348330406_DNS_Service_Model_Based_o...
Hi Chokri, Thanks for this article. It offers an interesting take on how to improve the existing DNS's technical infrastructure using blockchain. I am not qualified to comment on either the technical or practical suitability of taking this from theory to reality. However, this use of blockchain was not the source of the threats that started this thread, which inferred not just a new technology but a direct challenge to ICANN's management of a single DNS. The statement *"It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS
or certainly impacts the DNS."*
explicitly proposes that the threatened use of blockchain lies outside ICANN's DNS and may indeed be *designed* to compete with it. Further fearmongering of risk to ICANN is borne by the offer of hypothetical scenarios such as *"For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there
are conflicting Blockchain domains?"*
Just as it is vital to differentiate the different interests of registrants and Internet end-users (which for reasons unknown has long been a challenge to At-Large) it is also very important to separate the technical from the political. This issue seeks only to exploit blockchain as a buzzword and a tool of political leverage, rather than any offer of an innovative way for ICANN to manage the DNS. Cheers, - Evan
Roberto The power costs issue is going to have an impact on a lot of things over the next while. Our power bills in one of the data centres we use have tripled in the last few months (and no, our usage hasn’t gone up that much). We used to be able to negotiate a fixed rate per kwh for a year – that’s all gone now. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> Date: Friday, 26 August 2022 at 09:03 To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Cc: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com>, CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Hi Michele All what I have found is the real-time captioning of the session: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2017-day-0-salle-2-the-.... Searching for “Durand” will get you to his presentation. Maybe we can ask him directly about more material/information? The overarching question I have - off-topic, though - is whether the incredible rise in cost of energy will have an effect on further development and deployment of blockchain technologies, since this looks like using an inordinate amount of power. Cheers, Roberto On 26.08.2022, at 14:13, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: No – it was from the 2017 IGF, but I can’t find it online annoyingly ☹ It was a presentation by Alain Durand – there were also some panel sessions on similar topics at the same event -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday, 25 August 2022 at 18:33 To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> Cc: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>>, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Hi Michele, Do you mean this session https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2018-ws-408-dns-enhance.... Freindly regards Chokri Le mer. 24 août 2022 à 4:56 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> a écrit : Somebody with more patience than I might be able to find links to materials ICANN used at the IGF in Geneva a few years back. One of their technical team gave a very good presentation about “alternate identifiers”, which was very helpful. There definitely is the potential for confusion between “real” domains that actually resolve on the public internet and ones that don’t. I’m also having flashbacks to “new net” or whatever it was called from the 90s Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, 19 August 2022 at 15:40 To: Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr@gmail.com<mailto:chokribr@gmail.com>>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear CPWG, Before engaging with other ACs or even the Board on this issue, I believe the ALAC should decide whether they believe Blockchain domains are even within ICANN’s scope/mission. There is a good argument to be made that the activities that occur with Blockchain domain names are not within ICANN’s mission. ICANN’s mission is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems….” Question: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique identifier systems”? The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws). It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all. For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains? But to assume that ICANN has any jurisdiction over the Blockchain domains or any ability to “regulate” them (if that is even possible) is something we need to examine as it pertains to the mission/scope of ICANN. Sincerely, Jeff [cid:image001.png@01D8B3B7.2B1D30B0] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com<http://jjnsolutions.com/> From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 6:42 AM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Questions to the board about distributed DNS Dear Olivier, Thank you for your time and interest in this topic. I understand your point very well, and I totally agree with you and with other friends that we need to engage more discussion within our group in order to get the large consensual decision, and yes SSAC could be a good vis a vis at this stage. Friendly regards Chokri Le ven. 19 août 2022 à 11:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> a écrit : Dear Chokri, thanks for bringing this to the CPWG mailing list. Just explaining, I am not calling the questions "immature" - I think they are very pertinent questions, but in terms of maturity in the At-Large discussion, the ALAC position on these topics has not yet matured. Your launch of discussion here will indeed help, and I note that Justine's response relating to both OCTO and SSAC is very pertinent. I mentioned on the call that this could indeed be a topic for the customary discussion between SSAC and ALAC at this stage. Kindest regards, Olivier On 19/08/2022 12:07, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote: Dear friends, I personally have in mind those questions for the board about distributed DNS "Some ICANN accredited registrars sell some blockchain DNS based gTLDs, did the board encourage such activities? If some non regular DNS causes some collision with some regular DNS gTLD ,accredited by ICANN, how will ICANN act to resolve this issue?" If you continue to consider those questions immature as most of our friends mentioned during the call, I personally support Sebastien's proposal to constitute a subgroup that will continue to follow this topic. Thank you again for your interest in this topic. Friendly regards Chokri -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:40 AM Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: *Question*: Are blockchain domains part of “the Internet’s unique
identifier systems”?
The argument against this being in ICANN’s mission is that Blockchain domains are not part of the “DNS”. Thus, (a) uniform or coordinates resolution is not reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS (Section 1.1 (a)(i) of the ICANN Bylaws).
It is quite possible that Blockchain domains present a threat to the DNS or certainly impacts the DNS. So the appropriate questions for the Board/SOs/SCs and other is not how ICANN can be involved with Blockchain domains, but rather how does ICANN respond to the existence of the Blockchain Domains, if at all.
For example, will ICANN be able to delegate new TLDs in the DNS if there are conflicting Blockchain domains?
The answer appears staggeringly simple, since precedent exists. It's out of scope. However, this means that ICANN can and should wholly ignore the blockchain domains, meaning any conflicts are 100% the headache of the blockchain domain industry to resolve. In this sense, blockchain domain schemes such as The Handshake Network <https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/02/07/844900/handshake-network-dns-liv...> are no different from previous ICANN challenges such as AlterNIC or ORSC. They're no less dumb and doomed than AlterNIC, but that's their industry's headache and no concern of ICANN. Blockchain domains offer no more or less threat to ICANN than those did and should be treated with the same level of indifference. As a public interest body ALAC should probably choose to keep an eye on the development in case there is potential for end-user confusion, but it hasn't happened with the other DNS wannabes and no evidence exists that this threat is any greater. Cheers, - Evan
participants (13)
-
Bill Jouris -
Chokri Ben Romdhane -
Eduardo Diaz -
Evan Leibovitch -
gopal -
Holly Raiche -
Javier Rua -
Jeff Neuman -
Justine Chew -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Roberto Gaetano -
Wolfgang Kleinwächter