ICANN participation

Some weeks ago Michael Leibrandt, the German GAC representative until end of 2006, has issued on the CPSR mailing list an article about his personal view on the new gTLDs, especially the GeoTLDs.

Werner Staub, Tom Lowenhaupt and me (Dirk Krischenowski) made comments to Michaels article here:

Michael Leibrandt on GeoTLDs - Article and Comments

ICANN caused some confusion among potential applicants for new gTLDs when stating that the timeline by which ICANN staff operates sees the application process "in the latter half of 2008". After all it has been a mere 6 weeks ago ICANN issued a press release (http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-10may07.htm) in which the date was announced to be in early 2008. No one seems to remember this press release, but it is still on the website.

Welcome to the Whois information page where you can find out what Whois is, why it is important, why there has been so much argument over it, and where the resolution process is at the moment.

The factions of the ruling Social Democrats (SPD) and Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) in the German Parliament have submitted the resolution "Advancement of the adress space in the Internet" (printed paper no. 16/4564; courtesy translation) to the plenary on March 7. In it, the federal government is called upon to support new developments in the Internet name space.

I got notice yesterday evening of a class action brought to in a US Court against RF, eNom and ICANN.

Although I can understand why the plaintiff is naming eNom and ICANN ( though i don't think that she will succeed in demonstrating that there were illegal conduct from both ) it is somewhat baffling why some other registrars and registries are left alone from this action.

On the process of trying to solve the problem ICANN stated that it had come to an agreement with the registries (all? some of them?) so domains would not be lost.

ICANN has changed the method by which it draws input into its public meetings - including the public forum - in an effort to make it easier to interact, and hence encourage greater interaction.

-----------

For the ICANN public forum on Thursday 29 March 2007

Please note: You need to register with the site and be logged in to gain access to the chatrooms

-------------

Two day ago I received an email from eNom with an update for the reseller API.

Guess what? The new function implements something in the line of syncing the auth code with the registry.

Now this triggers something in my mind. If the auth key needs to be check by the gaining registrar to whom does it turns for confirmation of the EPP key? The registry? The losing registrar? What if their values are not in sync?

Again this whole EPP key process seems awkward. Again it looks far more simpler if it was the registrant the one with the key in hand ( and store it at registry level ).

Well i couldn't make it to Lisbon today... :-(

But would like to share my 2 cents on this

I'm really not against domain tasting de per se.

What really annoys me is the abuse some regsitrars make of their status. I thinks it's quite clear that some have just been created for the sole purpose of speculation on domain name trade. By using their registrar staus they are doing their dirty tricks for free.