[discuss] Possible approaches to solving "problem no. 1"
sm+1net at elandsys.com
Wed Feb 19 06:25:48 UTC 2014
At 13:23 18-02-2014, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
>Maybe if ICANN did a little less then it might be easier to place?
>I am intrigued by Steve Crocker's interesting note referencing RFC
>1591. If the market regulatory aspects of gTLDs was to be delegated
>as ccTLDs are to countries (jurisdictions) that could take a lot of
>the sting out of this tail.
>A repurposed ICANN for technical co-ordination between stakeholders
>including those jurisdictions might produce more substantial legal
>and diplomatic clue. The knot of issues crisscrossing through ICANN
>now look more like a Gordium knot than a slip knot.
"ICANN was born with a particular and intense focus on process and
Undue focus on process to the exclusion of substance and
effectiveness is the
second major problem facing ICANN."
Rumour has it that 63% of the gTLD contracts are with companies from
the United States. It is left to the reader to assess whether it
would be possible to have a change of jurisdiction (re. comment about
More information about the discuss