I recently finished reading the ICANN staff "Report on TLD applications" and would
like the board and public to know that I have personal knowledge that there are substantial
errors made by the auditors in their review of the IOD application for .web with
regards to access to technical resources.Specifically, the following statement
was made with regards to the IOD
application:
" In the judgment of the technical
team, the small pool of talent
available to Image Online Design is a very serious
deficiency in Image Online Design's proposal. Given the lack of identified technical
and management resources, the technical evaluation team concluded that there is a
very significant risk that Image Online Design will not be able to react quickly
to unpredictable surges in demand, especially during the critical startup period.
A failure to service a global customer base on a 24x7 basis, particularly during
the initial startup period, could fatally damage the
reputation of the new TLD.
"
This statement is made without merit, and is in direct contradiction with statements
made in the written application provided to ICANN. In the application IOD identified
UltraDNS, a provider of high-availability, highly-scalable DNS services as an outsource
provider for a significant portion of their infrastructure.
I would like to offer
some highlights of the talent and experience UltraDNS brings to the IOD application.
Combined
the UltraDNS team has:
over 115 years in systems, communications and network technology
85+
years in just internet technology development alone
45+ years in building global
networks with advanced routing and performance parameters
30 years in designing
and deploying advanced database systems
Further, they have an exceptional management
team, led by CEO Steve Kalman formerly of Softbank, CTO Steve Hotz who studied under
Jon Postel, and many, many other talented and seasoned individuals.
The providing
of a significant portion of the infrastructure needed to operate .web by UltraDNS
to IOD should also call into serious question the validity of objections raised by
the business/financial auditors with regards to the need for substantial up-front
capital.
As to where my personal knowledge of these matters stems from, I am the
former
Director of Operations at UltraDNS, and the person responsible for
introducing
IOD to UltraDNS.
For the record, I am no longer employed by UltraDNS, nor have
I ever received anything of value from IOD. My statements are made simply because
I find the grossly incorrect and misleading statements made by the auditors to be
an affront to the principles of a fair, balanced, and well-reviewed process. While
I believe there to much
more wrong with the staff report related to the IOD application,
I
am restricting my comments to those items I have personal knowledge of.
I would
like to close by calling on ICANN to provide the detailed, written audits made by
ICANN staff and outside parties to the public in the interest of openness, transparancy,
and so that interested parties might be afforded the opportunity to judge for themselves
the merits and veracity of auditors statements.