IP: ICAAN't seem to do anything right:: Good Morning Silicon Valley Thu Nov 16 12:00:12 EST 2000

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> ICAAN't seem to do anything right: The Internet Corporation for Assigned 
> Names and Numbers (ICANN) has been meeting throughout this week in the 
> hopes of approving the first new generic top-level Internet domains since 
> the advent of .com, .net and .org more than a decade ago. The agency is 
> <http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,40211,00.html>expected to 
> announce today just which new top level domains it plans to approve. Many 
> are convinced it will add fewer than 10 of the 44 that have been proposed, 
> which include .kids, .travel, .web. Regardless of what sort of 
> announcement is made today, one thing is certain: it's likely to be a 
> contentious one. Indeed, on Tuesday of this week two members of the House 
> of Representatives -- Edward Markey, D-Mass., and Lois Capps, D-Calif. -- 
> <http://www.newsbytes.com/news/00/158218.html>asked the Commerce 
> Department to delay its implementation of new generic TLDs until after the 
> government reviewed the level of competition in the domain registration 
> sector and in particular VeriSign Registry Services' (formerly Network 
> Solutions -- the agency that long held a monopoly over the domain 
> registration market) position in it. Markey and Capps described ICANN's 
> decision to move ahead with the approval of new domains as one that 
> appears "to be at odds with the fundamental rationale for which the 
> Commerce Department granted ICANN authority over these matters, namely, 
> that ICANN would move the Internet domain-name system away from its 
> monopolistic antecedents and would effectively implement the goal of 
> ensuring competition in the domain-name marketplace. Their missive 
> concluded with a caustic assessment of ICAAN's review process and the ill 
> will and frustration it might foster in the public. "In addition, ICANN's 
> own independent expert analysis of the potential new TLDs was not made 
> available for timely public review and comment...Such a closed process 
> leads to public frustration, speculation about motives and allegations 
> that ICANN's decisions are arbitrary or will stifle any serious 
> competition to NSI."