the panix hijacking and icann's transfer policy

[Marc Schneiders]

I see your point. But I will not do it. I have little time at the
moment and rather use it to prepare the special GNSO meeting Feb. 7/8
in Amsterdam.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, at 21:12 [=GMT-0500], Milton Mueller wrote:

> Marc:
> draft a statement telling us why you "don't believe in it."
> that can work.
>
> >>> Marc Schneiders <marc at SCHNEIDERS.ORG> 1/20/2005 3:17:24 PM >>>
> Since I don't believe in this move, as I explained, I suggest one of
> the other two council reps take this up. It is hard to draft a text
> you do not believe in. I will not block anything, but I really cannot
> lead the action. I hope you understand, thx.
>
> Marc
>
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, at 15:00 [=GMT-0500], Frannie Wellings wrote:
>
> > In the interest of getting things moving here, can the GNSO Council
> > members start drafting something?  Even bullet points as Milton
> > suggested?  Or if you have already started, can you let the list
> know?
> >
> > Many thanks!
> >
> > Best to all,
> >
> > Frannie
> >
> >
> > >Ideally, (i.e., the way things should work according to our
> charter)
> > >NCUC's policy committee, which consists of our elected GNSO Council
> > >members, should take the initiative here. If they can draft
> something -
> > >even just a list of bullet points - and send it to the list the rest
> of
> > >us can take it from there.
> > >
> > >>>>  Frannie Wellings <wellings at EPIC.ORG> 1/18/2005 4:43:35 PM >>>
> > >I understand Marc is hesitant, but I really think NCUC should issue
> a
> > >statement/submit comments about this.  ICANN is requesting comments
> > >on the transfer policy due February 1.  See:
> > >http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-12jan05.htm
> > >
> > >How do we want to go about this?
> > >
> > >Best,
> > >
> > >Frannie
> > >
> > >At 4:18 PM -0500 1/18/05, Milton Mueller wrote:
> > >>Marc:
> > >>Not quite sure whether a TLD wouild have helped panix yet, but I
> do
> > >>know that your analysis of Verisign and DNSSEC is not correct. The
> > >>reason DNSSEC cannot be implemented for .com is because there are
> so
> > >>many (tens of millions) of domain names in it. The processing
> > >>requirements of DNSSEC applied to that scale is a major problem.
> > >>
> > >>But the root zone, which contains TLD, does not now and never will
> > >>contain millions of records.
> > >>
> > >>>>>   Marc Schneiders <marc at schneiders.org> 1/18/2005 2:29:29 PM
> >>>
> > >>On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, at 12:04 [=GMT-0500], Milton Mueller wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>   This incident underscores one of the reasons why ICANN should
> have
> > >a
> > >>>   policy of regularly adding TLDs to make them available for
> those
> > >who
> > >>>   need and can operate them.
> > >>
> > >>Though I agree about adding more TLDs, I don't see how it helps in
> > >>hijacking domains.
> > >>
> > >>>   Businesses and noncommercial services that depend entirely on
> a
> > >>domain
> > >>>   name may want to have the option of owning, rather than
> "renting,"
> > >>their
> > >>>   domain in order to increase security.
> > >>
> > >>Maybe we can learn something from the trade mark people here as
> > >>regards ownership of something that can also become defunct, if
> you
> > >>don't use it?
> > >>
> > >>>   According to my imperfect
> > >>>   understanding, it is easier to implement DNSSEC at the TLD
> level
> > >than
> > >>at
> > >>>   the SLD level.
> > >>
> > >>I have little understanding of DNSSEC too. I do understand enough
> > >>about it, I think, to know that it would not have helped
> panix.com.
> > >>Also the implementation is most difficult precisely at the TLD
> level.
> > >>An engineer from VeriSign is the one who has time and again
> pointed
> > >>out (on IETF mailing lists, when I still had time to read them)
> that
> > >>the present protocol is impossible for a zone the size of .com. It
> > >>would take ages and a very, very powerful machine to sign it.
> > >>
> > >>Marc Schneiders
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >
> > >~~~
> > >Frannie Wellings
> > >Policy Fellow, the Electronic Privacy Information Center   ~
> > >http://www.epic.org
> > >Director, The Public Voice    ~   http://www.thepublicvoice.org
> > >
> > >1718 Connecticut Ave. N.W., Suite 200
> > >Washington, D.C.  20009
> > >USA
> > >
> > >wellings at epic.org
> > >
> > >+1 202 483 1140 x 107 (telephone)
> > >+1 202 483 1248 (fax)
> > >~~~
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > ~~~
> > Frannie Wellings
> > Policy Fellow, the Electronic Privacy Information Center   ~
> > http://www.epic.org
> > Director, The Public Voice    ~   http://www.thepublicvoice.org
> >
> > 1718 Connecticut Ave. N.W., Suite 200
> > Washington, D.C.  20009
> > USA
> >
> > wellings at epic.org
> >
> > +1 202 483 1140 x 107 (telephone)
> > +1 202 483 1248 (fax)
> > ~~~
> >
>