ARTICLES| bespoke web | design | editor | works
readings | SNIPPETS| technology | toronto
biochem | cancer | canna | n n | NET| other | plants | politics | social medicine | tech | truths | pollution | biology
01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 |45| 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52

Raoul Plommer
15 March 2018 · San Juan, Puerto Rico ·
The registrars pay 18 cents per domain and the registries pay 25 cents per domain. Basically, ICANN gets 43 cents on all of the ~330 million domains in existence per year. I think we could easily raise that fee by one cent per domain. The only people that this would really hurt, are the "domainers", i.e. people that have registered thousands of domains. For others, the added cost would be nothing but insignificant.
For example, I am not sure if the fellowship program's budget needs to be cut at all, but its impact does need to be measured better. That much is pretty much agreed by everyone in the community.
My point really is, that a lot of the increase in ICANN's budget is actually a direct consequence of dealing with more complex issues, with more complicated and numerous applications of the DNS, as well as the sheer number of domains and gTLDs in existence.
The need for work at ICANN has grown and so should its budget. On top of that, even ICANN isn't untouched by general inflation of prices. Denying that, is like denying the existence of gravity. 44
Raoul Plommer Author Just two years ago, we spent over hundred thousand dollars to see off a CEO, now we can't even afford celebrating the 20-year anniversary of ICANN in Barcelona. 😕 1
Calvin Browne Curious as to why you think a 1 cent fee increase will only "hurt" "domainers". Surely it will "hurt" everyone who has to pay it? 2
John McCormack replied ·
8 replies
Peter Larsen
Why not raise it to 10 usd a pop and everyone can get a tesla in Barcelona ? 6
Calvin Browne replied ·
6 replies
Calvin Browne Peter - hah - someone talking sense now.
Calvin Browne Interesting this establishment of ICANN being tied to its date it was officially incorporated in California. There's a certain irony here...
Rubens Kuhl ICANN is also benefiting from economies of scale, that largely outweighs inflation. 2
Raoul Plommer replied ·
2 replies Richard Sexton "The need for work at ICANN has grown" Actually icann could be turned off last tuesday and nobody but the hotels and airlines would notice. You'd still be able to get your email and play on book of face. Remember, compliance is voluntary. change two numbers and they don't exist more. It's just another choke point the net is used to routing around. 2
Raoul Plommer Author People who say that ICANN could cease to exist at any given point are (mostly willingly) ignoring the ramifications of that, if it actually happened. Who else is going to give us smiley domains in the future? 1
Simon Higgs Raoul Plommer You know there are people here who actually know how teh Interwebz really works, right?
Richard Sexton Who do you think invented smiley domains ?
And that protocol that replaced v6?
And bit torrent?
And blockchain?
Any cyber currency?
Icann just messes with stuff we invent. So we stopped telling them.
If we already had a way to route around icann in use the last people we'd tell this time are icann folks. It's not like they're going to find out on their own now is it?
So what icann has left is the worlds most corrupt registry that cost more to bill than to provide service, is only supported by well funded cluess crooks. Noticeably absent: consent of the governed, that's why you can't feel the love at an icann meeting, just the hangover.
ipvsec, vs, http ssh al don't work and rely on icann for their ability to bring down the network. Slick! v6 doesn't work and never will. He who shall not be named had better penetration in 3 mos that it has done in a decade.
That clinton era experient in light of the presidents plans to roll out national access? It icann was the walking dead when do you think you'd find out exactly?

Johan 'Julf' Helsingius So this is a non-commercial constituency rep arguing for charging more money from a lot of ordinary people - to what end?
Raoul Plommer replied ·
1 reply
Simon Higgs Just a reminder, Jon Postel’s original vision for New Corp was a $30,000 salary for a retiree to maintain the IANA lists. Everything above that is out of control spending. 6
Peter Larsen thats like argueing that horses are a safer and quicker way of transportation.
Simon Higgs
Simon Higgs Peter Czar Larsen That’s backwards. Arguing for an increase budget for ICANN is like arguing for a 70mph highway system for horses and buggies when everyone (except apparently you) knows IANA has an infinite improbability drive.
Peter Larsen no, backwards is argueing that you can do with $30000 usd because a guy said so 30 years ago (in internet time paraphrased to real time, is around 3-400 years of real time). Thats backwards.
Simon Higgs “...because a guy said so...” Image may contain: 1 person
Peter Larsen Yes? I do know who Jon Postel is, or was. Thanks. Do you have any other real arguments from this decade?
Simon Higgs Peter Czar Larsen Arguments are properly resolved on a first-come first-served basis per RFC1591. Teh Interwebz weren’t built simply to come up with a new argument and auction it off for a quick buck. Any idiot from any decade can do that.
Volker Greimann badge icon John Postel never supported a Fellowship program for ICANN 2
Richard Sexton "thats like argueing that horses are a safer and quicker way of transportation." No it's not. If you think that analogy holds please explain this tortured logic.… See more
Simon Higgs
Richard Sexton Peter Czar Larsen What is it you think Jon did?
Do you know how long it took?
What is it you think icann actually does?
Do you how long THAT took?

Raoul Plommer Author Raising fees of ICANN definitely seems like a taboo for the domain industry. You know, the same that controls ICANN in a way, that will shift expenses to the registrant and has successfully refused to budge an inch on paying more of those fees for over a decade.
Peter Larsen it's sounds so easy when it's not your own money you are collecting, but only using them 😃
Peter Larsen .... and basicly, you want to have the extra money so you can have an 20 year anniversary party (as the main reason). Go buy your own beer, thanks.
Raoul Plommer Author That's not true. I own several domains and the increase of a cent or few per annum is entirely insignificant even to me, who has income of less than €1000 per month.
Raoul Plommer Author I gave the past CEO's party and the coming anniversary as examples of the extent of change in attitudes, that has already happened. It is by no means a reason to increase the fees. The biggest reasons are the increased work load of ICANN and general i… See more
Raoul Plommer Author You can try to ridicule me all you want Peter, but you're not doing that well so far. 🙂
Peter Larsen Raoul Plommer Actually you are right, you are much better at it yourself 😃
Raoul Plommer Author I hope you didn't lose all of your sleep over that little quip.
Peter Larsen thank you for proving my statement.
Richard Sexton This is assuming ICANN should get any money at all.
How about they pay instead of take a tax? We could vote on it. Since ICANN is mandated to "measure and implement consensus" if we all vote to end it, there's no mechanism of opposition.
So how much would ICANN like to pay for the privilege of doing whatever it is they do?
I do not think increasing the domain tax without any representation or a way to stop or lower it is a good idea, especially in the land that created the "no taxation without representation" idea.

Kevin Murphy badge icon Not all 330 million domains. Just the gTLD ones. 5
John McCormack replied ·
3 replies
Volker Greimann badge icon No thank you!
Dmitry Kohmanyuk Every currency is falling against the dollar. Since most people are not in US, it is actually inflated cost. For euro, for example.
And of course being in one of most expensive cities in US doesn’t help. Denver, Chicago, Minneapolis all have lower co… See more
Dmitry Kohmanyuk replied ·
2 replies
Jothan Frakes Raoul Plommer keep working on ideas. this increase of $.01 would likely not make things any different perhaps facebook with all of their solutions could charge .02 per like and comment - literally solve the problem by everyone pitching in their two… See more 1
Christopher Ambler How about ICANN roll back the theft of .web from me and I’ll pay what’s needed?
Christopher Ambler replied ·
2 replies Richard Sexton Even better J, charge people for wrong answers. How bout we make a working version of .green and excise the wrong one. That was one one worst travesty than .web. And there I didn't even think that was possible.
Rob Golding "a lot of the increase in ICANN's budget is actually a direct consequence of dealing with more complex issues" No, it's entirely down to mission creep, empire building, out of control spending, gravy-train riders and cronyism. The transition is done, … See more 2
Barry Shein I don't think ICANN has nearly the budget or income streams for the portfolio set before them. That doesn't mean there isn't waste though waste can be in the eyes of the beholder, and a product of a changing set of responsibilities.… See more 1
Raoul Plommer replied · 1 reply
James Bladel The existing fees are already burdensome on Registrants, the vast majority of whom have no idea that ICANN exists nor perceive any direct benefit from it. Your idea sounds a lot like me proposing every citizen of Belgium add $0.01 to their taxes so I … See more 6
Volker Greimann replied · 16 replies
Raoul Plommer
Author One thing is certain, this thread is not lacking BA.
Simon Higgs replied · 2 replies
Franck Martin
Ah, raising taxes... much easier than controlling costs...
Remember me, buy my shirts!
pop art