[governance] The Pew gTLD Progam is no more a swindle

[JFC Morfin]

The ICANN procedures are cute. They are not that easy to understand, 
follow and eventually comply with. However, they time to time, 
ultimately permit some transparency in order to show that it was 
possible not to pay ICANN for something small when you can get 
"samething" big for free (but without the ICANN legalities).

In the Pew gTLD Program case, I made an effort to try to save ICANN 
millions. You will find it at the URL 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/new-gtld-applicant-support-handbook/msg00013.html.

I hope this demonstrate enough that ICANN and the US Governments are 
not crooks:
- they only did not "underline" the full truth, as every good sales, 
at it results from the small prints
- however, and I am the proof, they made nothing to prevent the truth 
from being published before the gTLD candidates send their requests 
and checks.

The truth is that:

1. there is no technical difference between gTLDs and IDNgTLDs except 
non contractual foreign software application (punycode family of 
alogithms) TLD registrant cannot control.

2. ICANN uses a "de facto" situation to register TLDs that can be "de 
jure" (RFCs) replicated in 65,535 other DNS top level registries.

3. TLDs may use protected IRNs (International Root Names) by WIPO or 
ISO. The use of a string as a TLD does not protect it as an IRN.

4. ICANN stays at the IETF Internet end to end layers under the 
ignorance of the US Government. This is obsolete: IETF RFCs have 
already transparently made inteligent users to scale to fringe to 
fringe Internet+. http://iutf.org/wiki/Internet%2B_architectural_Framework.

This makes clear that the ICANN Pew gTLD Program brings to its gTLD 
registrants is a very worked-out screen of paper to sign and an entry 
in the DNS CLASS "IN" (ICANN/NTIA) every of us can replicate,
- in full right: in 255 other CLASSes
- at least in test: in 65.375 other ones.

If this was plainly stated in the Agreement, this would be perfectly 
honnest. As it is not, Courts may have to decide.

However, in favor of ICANN:

1. my mail was published by ICANN within the Pew gTLD Program 
dedicated part, on a public forumeveryone could read.

2. RFC are publicly published and TLD would be Managers should know 
them to correctly operates the service they plan to sell. After 
several RFCs over the last 29 years of DNS operations, 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5395>RFC 5395 states anew: "DNS 
CLASSes have been little used but constitute another dimension of the 
DNS distributed database. In particular, there is no necessary 
relationship between the name space or root servers for one data 
CLASS and those for another data CLASS. The same DNS NAME can have 
completely different meanings in different CLASSes. The label types 
are the same, and the null label is usable only as root in every 
CLASS. As global networking and DNS have evolved, the IN, or 
Internet, CLASS has dominated DNS use. [] The current CLASS 
assignments [] are as follows:

This simply means that for each ".abcd" top-zone IDNgTLD paid K$ 
185++ to ICANN, there can be 65,535 other ".abcd" top-zones in the 
DNS. Some will be immediatel because the IUTF is going to accept a 
few CLASSes for family protection, customer documentation, testing of 
third party applications, etc.

jfc
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120111/21ece7dd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/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