Subject: The Dual Problems of ICANN and New gTLDs

From: Rick Harris <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:35:53 -0400

The Dual Problem(s) of ICANN and New gTLDs

I respectfully offer two separate and really rather simple solutions for
dealing with (a) the politics of ICANN and (b) the apparent technical
limitations of the DNS- where "limitations" means the correct analysis set
forth in RFC 2826 - viz: "...[t]here is no getting away from the unique root
of the public DNS. The answers to(a) and (b) are of course interdependent.

ICANN is itself replicable - but replication for practical purposes depends
on a method for assigning the new TLDs independently of ICANN. (Why
replicate ICANN if there is no alternative method for assigning new TLDs and
associated domain names if they do not resolve inside the root?).

Therefore - as to (a) above, please try "New Internet Company For Assigned
Names and Numbers (NICANN) at www.nicann.com. The web site (which is empty
and awaits its founding fathers) has been trademarked.

As to the matter of replicating the unique root of the public DNS, and to do
so in a way that eliminates the possibility of address ambiguity (as
correctly noted in RFC 2826)  - the problem is not difficult.  Only one
existing address that resolves inside the root is required to manage all
other (parallel) addressing schemes, including all new TLDs, provided that
all the  "new" addresses themselves properly resolve inside the existing
root zone of the DNS.

Properly resolved means that is therefore imperative that great care must be
taken to avoid ambiguity so that existing addresses are themselves not
inadvertently or deliberately compromised. There must also be a parallel
who is lookup. Nonetheless, only one address is required  but it must be the
*right* address. Once that problem is solved, the ultimate problem of
(dealing with) ICANN is also solved. Trademark problems and attempts at
reverse hijacking by corporations are thereby also solved.

The apparent but avoidable problems of ICANN's seemingly flawed political
process as well as the matter of new TLDs and the addresess that attach to
them - are within reach. I'm not saying its easy - but as many persons who
either read or write to this list are undoubtably aware, it can be done -
right now.

The answer to ICANN and therefore the matter of new TLDs, including a
limited but reasonable number of new TLDs - is right there in front of
anyone who cares to think about the problem - find the *right* address(es)
and then act accordingly.

When that happens - I surmise that energetic and progressive persons can
easily dump ICANN entirely and at the same time also set up  their own
"inside the root" administrative structure for managing a parallel (and
complimentary) architecture for the DNS - which includes selling the related
domain names that attach to the new TLDs. That the process of achieving
parallelism in the DNS can be sanctioned only by NTIA, U.S. Commerce
Department and (therefore) ICANN is a myth. At least one of the keys to the
conundrum posed in  RFC 2826 is within reach.
Cheers, Rick Harris