Re: ICANN extracts $20m signing fee for $1bn dot-com price increases and guess who's going to pay for it?

[Rubens Kuhl <rubensk () gmail com>]

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:58 PM Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf () dessus com> wrote:

> On NANOG list <nanog () nanog org>, Dan Hollis <goemon () sasami anime net>
> wrote:
>
> > https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/01/07/icann_verisign_fees/
>
> Operator of the dot-com registry, Verisign, has decided to pay DNS
> overseer ICANN $4m a year for the next five years in order to “educate
> the wider ICANN community about security threats.”
>
> > 98% of the comments were opposed.
>
> > How many / which companies would have to get onboard in order to get
> > enough support for an icann alternative?
>
> > Is such a thing even feasible?
>
> Forget about being opposed or not.  If ICANN wants to buy education
> about security threats why are they receiving money?  Quite obviously
> something fishy is going on (or El Reg is full'o'shit).
El Reg is more of a tabloid than industry media, but you can read almost
the same views at domain industry blogs:
http://domainincite.com/25129-breaking-verisign-pays-icann-20-million-and-gets-to-raise-com-prices-again
https://domainnamewire.com/2020/01/03/com-prices-are-going-up-after-verisign-pays-off-icann/


Rubens