[discuss] governments and rule of law (was: Possible approaches to solving...)

Shatan, Gregory S. GShatan at ReedSmith.com
Thu Feb 27 08:05:46 UTC 2014

>>>Comments inline.

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of Elisabeth Blanconil
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:50 AM
To: David Conrad; Michel Gauthier
Cc: discuss at 1net.org List
Subject: Re: [discuss] governments and rule of law (was: Possible approaches to solving...)

Thank you Conrad for this informed response. It is interesting for me in order to document what different are the different VGN configuration costs and revenues.

At 14:05 26/02/2014, David Conrad wrote:
>On Feb 26, 2014, at 9:10 AM, Michel Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:
> > You know the rule: if ICANN works for free for me, I am the
> product. Why would I be your product?

You have to know that Califiornian "main-morte" corporations are illegal in France and other countries where they are assimilated (French Revolution) to robbers bands.

>>>This comment makes no sense -- A US corporation, from any state, whether non-profit or for-profit is not a "main-morte" corporation, and US corporations are certainly not "illegal" in France.

> > If you do not sell me, if you do not sell to me, it means we are
> in competition somewhere. Economy is made that way.
>"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of
>in your philosophy."
>   - Hamlet (1.5.167-8)

To accept Hamlet philosophy or not accept Hamlet philosophy is not my accountant cup of tea. Sorry. I need a clear model to explain the various configuration of open, protected, closed VGNs.

>>>This exchange seems to have driven off into the weeds....

> > Where does ICANN get its money from?.
>section 3.

Registry: $37,406,000
Registrar $35,856,000
RIR $823,000
ccTLD $2,000,000
IDN ccTLD $0
Meeting Sponsorships $800,000
New gTLD Registry/Registrar $1,985,000
Revenue $78,870,000

This means that they have the same budget as us: $ 0 from internet users.

>>>Now you want users to start paying (more) for the internet, and to underwrite internet governance organizations?  That does not seem to be a  good idea for users, although advertisers might be relieved to know that they no longer need to subsidize the "free" internet.

> > But ICANN claims it is important to all of us because it runs the RSS.
>ICANN does not claim to run the root server system. ICANN operates the
>"L" root server. ICANN also provides a venue for root server operators
>to discuss topics relevant to root server operations and ICANN (RSSAC),
>but that advisory committee does not "run the RSS"
>(to put it mildly).

OK. Michel was mistaken.
ICANN is not mistaken I suppose when it says that its missions are:

(1) the coordination of the assignment of technical protocol parameters including the management of the address and routing parameter area (ARPA) top-level domain;

* technical protocols are discussed by IETF. The most demanding part of the VGNIC I expect is to consolidate an I*Book from RFCs for VGN IUser to get informed about the technology they use in a practical form. ICANN does not carry that type of work as far as I understand.

* ARPA zone file: http://www.internic.net/zones/arpa.zone. How many people should we allocate to that task on your opinion?

(2) the administration of certain responsibilities associated with Internet DNS root zone management such as generic (gTLD) and country code (ccTLD) Top-Level Domains;
* decision by the NTIA
* As far as we are concerned we will only document what people will tell us they need to know. Since we do not claim to be authoritative, that work should be carried by EZOP and tools like libbint, etc. we want to see integrated in netix for them to be independent from the OS.

(3) the allocation of Internet numbering resources; and
* this is the Internet equivalent to X.121 and E.164: how many people are dedicated to that task at ICANN and ITU? On your opinion how many should we consider for the VGNIC?

(4) other services.
ICANN performs the IANA functions under a U.S. Government contract.
* I do not see USG originated revenue for this contract.
* would ICANN accept a similar contract from other Governments either in the ICANN/NTIA class or in other classes? Or would rather see us assuming such contracts?

> > Bill documented that a root-server costs only $ 200.
>You conveniently omit Bill's comments regarding opex (operational
>expenses) and I believe Bill was talking about a single instance
>intended to be what's considered a "local root server instance"
>suitable for a limited set of queriers and does not take into account
>the costs of connectivity, cooling, power, administration, etc. Such
>instances are not expected to receive significant queries and are thus
>quite inexpensive (although I personally would argue that $200 is too

Bill was correcting JFC's evaluation of $ 1000 for a local server instance in an existing computer room by an African operator, or a FLOSS non-profit having local cooperation.

>As I mentioned in a previous response, if you wish to provide a root
>server capable of responding to global queries and do it well (that is,
>professionally), you're going to have to spend a lot of money (on the
>order of US $millions/year).  How much depends on a number of
>variables, of which hardware cost is among the less significant.
>Bandwidth and co-lo costs are likely to be the major expenditures.

I am not sure ORSN people can foot that kind of bill?

> >> In ICANN's own constellation, the L-root, pretty much anyone who
> signs up to participate is welcome to do so.
> > Perfect. And I suppose they do not pay you and you do not pay them?
>Yep. Shocking as it might be, some folks actually do things without
>getting paid.

Well, you know many folks spending $millions/year that way. If they are the US Army or the NASA, I suppose they are getting paid by the tax-payers. Even non-connected ones.
Our target is obviously to reduce that cost. In particular bandwidth and co-lo costs in hosting that information on the users' machine or at their local resolution service.

> > But why would ICANN pick NTIA's calls in the first place?
>ICANN answers many, many calls. Really.

No doubt. Question is how much each of them is productive for the users. How does ORSN?
Which ones should VGNICS also carry to relieve the common burden and address the real user's needs?
What would be of interest would be a break down of the origins of the receive phone-calls. IRT the NTIA several staff members claimed in the past to have daily phone calls with them.


discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org

                                                                * * *

This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered
confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in
error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply
e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or
use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other
person. Thank you for your cooperation.

                                                                * * *

To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we
inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax
advice contained in this communication  (including any attachments) is not
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1)
avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state
and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another
party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
                                                                        Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00

More information about the discuss mailing list