Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet

ICANN Recommends ISOC Run .org TLD 113

Amazing Quantum Man writes "According to ZDNet, ICANN has issued a report recommending that ISOC run the .org TLD. It looks like ISOC would run .org in conjunction with Afilias." mesozoic points out that ISOC is a non-profit organization composed of many for-profit heavyweights, writing "I'm not surprised; are you?" This preliminary report may be disappointing to those who hoped that Paul Vixie and Carl Malamud would be successful in their bid to head up .org.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ICANN Recommends ISOC Run .org TLD

Comments Filter:
  • by pgrote ( 68235 ) on Tuesday August 20, 2002 @09:00PM (#4108752) Homepage
    This is the ICANN evaluation. [icann.org] It shows why they did and who they looked at. Good reading. Seems above board to me.

    Lonely Sig Alert: http://www.compunotes.com
  • Nepotism? (Score:5, Informative)

    by ukryule ( 186826 ) <slashdot&yule,org> on Tuesday August 20, 2002 @09:39PM (#4108902) Homepage
    Hmm ... seems the decisions hasn't been too well accepted at ICANNWatch [icannwatch.org]. To quote:
    ISOC was formerly headed by Vint Cerf, who is now the Chair of ICANN's Board. ICANN's vice-chair, Alejandro Pisanty, is chair of ISOC-Mexico.

    It seems ISOC is a body which is busy reforming itself to reduce the power of individual members [open-isoc.org] ... can't think why ICANN like them!
  • Not my choice (Score:5, Informative)

    by karl.auerbach ( 157250 ) on Tuesday August 20, 2002 @10:37PM (#4109165) Homepage
    The ISOC proposal didn't pass the smell test. When I looked at these proposals one of my requirements is that no present or past (within 24 months) ICANN director or officer had any role of significant influence (again within 24 months) with the applicant. Needless to say, with two ICANN directors having influential roles in ISOC, I didn't allow ISOC's to be on my own short list.

    ICANN's own conflict of interest rules are not this strict. But I consider ICANN's conflict-of-interest policy to be a minimum standard (and a weak minimum at that.) My vote is looking to be cast in favor of the best applicant, not the one that passes bare minimums.

    I also wonder at the concept that competition is promoted by handing .org over to a body that uses for its backroom operations a company that itself has a substantial presence (i.e. it has its own top level domain that it got from ICANN two years ago.) To my way of thinking, this is a move that concentrates control and reduces competition rather than decentralizes control and promotes competition.

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss

Working...