[At-Large] 300 million people have spoken with one voice "WE DON'T NEED ICANN"

[Evan Leibovitch]

Joe Baptista wrote:
> When I see ICANN supporters introduce the misguided argument on the "REAL"
> root I know were making progress.
>   
Not everyone here is an ICANN "supporter". We're here to help it do the
right thing, which in some cases means a 80-degree course change from
current direction.

> So - who here can see the Chinese National TLD system?  Who can surf to
> Peking University at its official web site address used extensively in china
>
> http://北京大学.中国/ <http://xn--1lq90ic7fzpc.xn--fiqs8s/>
>   
I can't. But tell me the IP addresses of the Chinese root servers and I
probably can.

There are also some alternative DNS systems which claim to resolve both
the conventional ICANN domains as well as the Chinese on *and* OpenNIC:

The only one I could find easily was the http://www.cesidianroot.net/
whose origins and purpose I can't at all understand by reading the site.
All I know is that they support TLDs for (amongst others): .ili
(Independent Long Island) and .geek

> I very proud of the Chines government.  They took charge of their internet.
> They made it their business to understand the technology.
... so they could use it to limit domestic access to the outside world.
I guess one's level of pride is based on how one views how the mastery
of technology has been used (or abused, as the case may be).

> While other governments helped ICANN build a bureaucracy - the Chinese gave them the finger.  Thats three hundred million fingers people.
>   
Despite protestations to the contrary, It's highly unlikely that so many
people speak with the same voice. Or that so many people know or care
about the issue.

> ICANN is a fools paradise.  No one is happy with ICANN.
I wouldn't say "no one". Many service providers and registries have done
very well with it, not to mention an entire industry of lobbyists, IP
lawyers, contractors and other interests who have built careers or
businesses through their interaction with ICANN. It's quite a tidy
little money-printing machine if you're well placed. Of course, such
reality does not deter one from the challenge of making ICANN more
responsive to internet consumers.

> I recommend governments don't end up dependent on ICANN.  If you want secure infrastructure - NATIONALIZE YOUR ROOT. Create your own TLD infrastructure
>   
Not until there's a protocol to resolve when two countries (or two root
server operators) have/want the same TLD going to different locations.
Even ICANN's status quo is better than the chaos that would create.
Having said that, a transition of ICANN from a JPA-bound US entity to an
agency that enables/enforces a formal international treaty is not the
worst idea I've heard.

- Evan