[governance] People's Daily of China: US must hand over Internet control to the world

[David Conrad]

Dominique,

On Aug 21, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Dominique Lacroix <dl at panamo.eu> wrote:
>> My guess (informed by the Kieren's comment "the entire domain is now down and has been for some time") would be that the .IQ name servers went offline/were misconfigured such that by the time the .IQ redelegation occurred, the .IQ name servers were not providing answers so any .IQ second-level domains would not show up on the Internet.
> So, I presume the 18 months sequence could be:
> - The registry manager disappears (tourism or whatever)

 From what I've read, the original delegation to Elashi/Infocom in Texas was in 1997. Elashi was indicted in 2002 and went to trial in 2004.

> - The tanks scare the rare ISP, registrars and clients.

> - The telecom lines are destroyed.
> - The registry becomes empty.

I've no idea what happened to the original 2LD registrations however I suspect it more likely that the folks at Infocom were busy doing other things (e.g., staying out of jail) than to concern themselves with managing .IQ, ensuring the name servers were operating effectively, etc.

> - As it is a ccTLD and that we are app. 10 years ago, nobody claims any very light fees that could be asked for.

My impression from stuff I've read on the Internet (so it must be true! :-)) was that .IQ 2LDs were handed out as favors, not that .IQ was a significant money maker.

> - Some ISP engineers could see, during some weeks, that a domain generates some technical issues, but its a very little phenomenon beside day to day network life.

Or, the fact that a TLD is having issues is so common that most folks don't care unless they're trying to get to a domain in one of those TLDs.  For example, if you look at https://tldmon.dns-oarc.net/nagios/, you'll see there are 200 warnings. TLD delegations are pretty clean now at least compared to the way things were historically.

> - The app. 200 owners cannot reniew their domain and they guess that something may be broken.

If the owners were in Iraq, they might have had other concerns as well.

> - The .iq problem becomes visible when the question of rebuilding iraqi networks is on a possible agenda.


According to http://www.usatoday.com/tech/world/2004-06-28-iq-snafu_x.htm, there was a concerted push in the 2004 timeframe to get the redelegation done. For those that believe ICANN is at the beck and call of the USG, it might be worth noting that the redelegation still took a year to get done despite calls by the urging documented in that article.

Regards,
-drc


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t