[CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS

[Mutegeki Cliff]

It's good you brought this about. Been thinking this for a while. In
addition to that, i have been wondering what ICANN's stand regarding Web
3.0 in general is.?

*Kind Regards, *
*..............................*
*Mutegeki Cliff Agaba *
*Website: www.mutegekicliff.com <http://www.mutegekicliff.com>*
*Phone : + 256 776 800 679 *


On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 at 13:56, Chokri Ben Romdhane via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
wrote:

> Hi all,
> Any comments about yesterday's webinar about  Internet Fragmentation,
> Reconsidered
> <https://livestream.com/internetsociety/citi-fragmentation/videos/233809733?origin=stream_live&mixpanel_id=136bcbdee9b6e-007947519-13134557-1fa400-136bcbdee9c115a&acc_id=14077045&medium=email>
>  ?
> Friendly regards,
> Chokri
>
>
> Le mar. 4 oct. 2022 à 12:35, Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr at gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> 1+ Evan let's wait for SSAC Work party report probably by the end of next
>> year !
>> Chokri
>>
>> Le mar. 4 oct. 2022 à 08:52, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Hi Annett,
>>>
>>> My takeway is that  it would be important for ALAC to keep an eye on the
>>>> developments of blockchain domains globally for the sole purpose of
>>>> advocating for and protecting the interests of the Internet end users.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agree. "Keep an eye on it" is the best ALAC can do ... and if there are
>>> real, user-affecting changes that call for advice to the Board or other
>>> constituencies then that is wholly appropriate. But not until then.
>>>
>>> BTW, I'm not suggesting that there is no place for discussing DNS
>>> alternatives, just maintaining that ICANN (and by inference ICANN At-Large)
>>> is not the place for it. This is exactly the kind of issue that the IGF
>>> needs to be discussing, and perhaps it's also worthy of ISOC and/or its
>>> chapters. I note in my review of the applicable Bylaws that ICANN should
>>> coordinate with other bodies as recommended by the IETF, so that is also a
>>> place where this topic can be raised at the appropriate time.
>>>
>>> When the blockchain-registry-wannabes get on the radar of IETF as
>>> something worthy of consideration, we can revisit this again in a different
>>> light. Until then it's all just vapor and threats.
>>>
>>> - Evan
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CPWG mailing list
>>> CPWG at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
>>> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
>>> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy)
>>> and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos).
>>> You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
>>> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20221118/90be2ffc/attachment-0001.html>