[At-Large] Role of ICANN in US/Verisign seizures of .com domains

JFC Morfin jefsey at jefsey.com
Sat Mar 10 10:22:58 UTC 2012

At 18:02 09/03/2012, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
>Carlton et al
>As a registrar based in the EU every time I see these kind of 
>stories I get very nervous.
>Gambling (both online and offline) is legal in Ireland. As far as I 
>know most of the big Irish sites are using .com domain names, but 
>have been blocking US users from accessing them. But if the US were 
>to seize those domains this would have a horrible "chilling effect".
>The Wired.com article on recent seizures is worth reading 
>I suspect that this will be a fairly hot topic this week in Costa Rica


the problem is that you are yourself the source of the problem. 
Registrars have been created by ICANN to build something they would 
be sovereign on. Since ICANN is associated with the NTIA (affirmation 
of commitment) in running the IN (ICANN/NTIA) CLASS there are two 
ways of dealing with this that ICANN has clearly proposed in its 
ICP-3 fundamental document.

1. you experiment a new way of managing that ICANN/NTIA CLASS that 
may lead to a technology not using a unique root.
2. you use another CLASS you are entitled to (there are 65,535 other ones).

This seems rather fair and realistic.

My "Internet+" IETF Drafts (architectural framework: 
where to document this architecture:
offer a response to those two points.

However, the implied change in our Internet Use is such that the 
evolution has to be smoothly managed. This is why I prefered Google 
to implement it first, to show the world that it is here and what is 
*adds* to the existing Internet legacy (does not change a single bit) 
: this is Google+ and PublicDNS. They make the Internet Google 
centric. Once this has been understood the people centric Internet+, 
the ML-DNS (multi-layer access to the DNS on the user side) and Netix 
(a network integrated command set) will come as an open response to 
the closed Google+ approach. Like Open Sources came as a response to 

One cannot avoid what is in the Internet genes. All this is in RFC 
791 principle of robustness, RFC 1958 principle of permanent change, 
RFC 3439 principle of simplicity, RFC 5895 implied principle of 
subsidiarity as a response to the lack of presentation layer. The 
problem is to welcome it in the best manner and in not creating havoc.


More information about the At-Large mailing list