[91123] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ICANN at risk
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Tue Jul 4 18:58:41 2006
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 22:58:09 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@verizonbusiness.com>
In-reply-to: <20060704.120328.26645.344247@webmail39.lax.untd.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Fergie wrote:
>
> Interesting timing, indeed, considering the UK is beginning
> (again?) to examine alternatives -- and Nominet playing a role
> there, too:
>
> http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1812343,00.html
So, with ICANN 'now' starting to forge alliances and make partnerships,
despite some possibly bad moves early on, and despite some overly heavy
handedness on the USGov's part over the years. Is 'no more ICANN' really a
good move? Jay seems to make a good point, the devil you know vs the 'new'
devil :(
Would some/all of the ICANN situation been different had the USGov't just
walked away one day one?
> -- Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:
>
> The timing is interesting, given that DENIC and Nominet have recently
> come to an agreement of sorts with ICANN.
