I'm glad that Vint Cerf took the time to answer these questions and I'm glad that he chose to answer some of mine, but I find myself pretty unsatisfied with some of the answers he offered. This is all defensive of the status quo. The answers don't acknowledge problems and don't provide information about the future. I think an ICANN public relations person would have provided similar answers.

Q15: Does ICANN view the bulk domain monetization business as a legitimate activity that contributes constructively to the Internet as a communications tool?—by Tom Cross

Vint Cerf: As an engineer, I must admit that this particular “business” has been a surprise for me. However, it seems to fit within the present framework allowed by domain name operation. Advertising seems to be the primary driver here and it is argued by interested parties that advertising is an important form of commercial communication and therefore qualifies as a constructive Internet application.

I think this is insane. The exact same thing could be said about spam. This next one is similarly frustrating.

Q10: Why can’t Domain Name Holders automatically request anonymity without having to pay their Registrar, which really does NOT cost those Registrars anything extra?—by Search Engines Web

Vint Cerf: While I cannot speak for any Registrar (not being conversant with all their costs), there is always some cost associated with doing anything special. There is a tension between the desire for open WHOIS information and the desire of some registrants to be anonymous. That tension has yet to be satisfactorily resolved in policy discussions especially in the GNSO. One of the proposals has been to implement tiered access to WHOIS information, possibly by adopting a new technical substructure for implementing the system. Until that happens, registrars that are offering some form of anonymity apparently do so by adding procedures to the normal registration and apparently adding to cost.

No one had to do anything special until ICANN made accurate DNS WHOIS the law. All of the additional procedures that registrars have to follow to allow for identity protection are a direct and obvious product of ICANN policy. If ICANN hadn't stuck its nose in, people wouldn't have to pay more money to protect their identities, and people could still subpoena registrant contact information just like they do now.

Answers from Vint Cerf: The Road Ahead for Top-Level Domains