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

[Evan Leibovitch]

Hi Gopal,

IMO your analysis of scope is largely correct with one, possibly-important,
exception

You wrote:

#4. ICANN ensures minimum standards compliance from the domain name
registrars. The accreditation agreement specifies  the rules and procedures
applicable to the provision of Registrar Services


I would append to the first sentence of that "... the domain registrars *over
which it has authority".*

ICANN has oversight on most top-level domains and develops regulations (in
the form of contract terms)  for the registries and registrars that use
those top-level domains. However, there are quite a few top-level domains
in the DNS over which it has zero authority. A non-exhaustive list of
examples includes:

   - "Country code" domains such as .de, .jp, .in and most other two-letter
   top-level domains (some of which -- such as .ly .tv and others -- compete
   directly and openly with ICANN-overseen domains but don't need to have the
   same governance or policies). It should be noted that some of these
   country-code registries are excellent and exceed ICANN standards, and many
   country code registries work with ICANN (voluntarily) through the ccNSO
   - Historical top-level domains such as that are guided by mechanisms
   mostly independent of ICANN's (and generally do not work through registrar
   networks). There is only one country in the world that can use .gov or .mil
   or .edu 🙂, The only one of these applicable outside the US is .int and
   its membership is restricted to UN-treaty organizations.
   - Other special cases such as the .onion pseudo-domains that was defined
   by IETF
   - Non-DNS clones that are independently created, such as the various
   alternate root systems that have come and gone and the alleged
   blockchain-based threat that started this discussion

I have long maintained that it has been a long-shirked responsibility of
ICANN to teach the public that not all domains are its
responsibility/fault, and that (for instance) buying/using a domain in .co
is not the same as one in .com. ALAC should be pushing such public-facing
campaigns -- after all, nobody else in ICANN will -- but it has yet to
discover a champion within it for this kind of thing.

Cheers,

Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
@evanleibovitch / @el56
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20221002/7b4a650a/attachment.html>