Evan Leibovitch evan at telly.org
Tue Dec 5 03:30:30 UTC 2017

So I looked. Well. there is this amusing snippet in the background

(Item 37, Page 13)

Second, the Title II Order found that DNS94 and caching95 used in broadband
> Internet access service were just used “for the management, control, or
> operation of a telecommunications system or the management of a
> telecommunications service.”96 The Commission has previously held this
> category applies to “adjunct-to-basic” functions that are “incidental” to a
> telecommunications service’s underlying use and “do not alter [its]
> fundamental character.”97 As such, these functions generally are not
> “useful to end users, rather than carriers.”98 We seek comment on how DNS
> and caching functions are now used, whether they benefit end users,
> Internet service providers, or both, and whether they fit within the
> adjunct-to-basic exception. How would broadband Internet access service
> work without DNS or caching? Would removing DNS have a merely incidental
> effect on broadband Internet users, or would it fundamentally change their
> online experience? Absent caching, would broadband Internet users that now
> expect high-quality video streaming see only incidental changes or more
> fundamental changes? Are there other ways that DNS or caching are used for
> “for the management, control, or operation of a telecommunications system”?
> Are there any other aspects of the Title II Order’s treatment of DNS or
> caching that should be reconsidered here?

Unless I am missing a larger context (totally possible), it would seem that
based on this section, that the FCC has mused (but not acted) on action on
the DNS, wondering out loud if it is even necessary and could be removed
without incurring "fundamental changes" in user experience....

Still, the substance of the document never mentions the DNS, domain names,
or even IP addresses, beyond the background info. As such I agree with John
that discussion of Net Neutrality, as important as the topic is, lies well
beyond the scope of anything ICANN is able to affect and, as such, beyond
any useful attention by At-Large. The fact that this group has been
assembled (at ICANN's expense) and contains many people interested in the
topic is not in itself justification to abuse its forums with wannabe
mission-creep. ICANN has enough difficulty in addressing that which is
within scope.


​- Evan​
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20171204/6b94c49a/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list