[ga-full] Re: [aso-policy] RE: [aso-comment] IP address holders - are theyrepresented?

["!Dr. Joe Baptista" <baptista@pccf.net>]

On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Michael Sondow wrote:

> It doesn't serve any useful purpose to repeat nostrums and empty
> formulas, does it? ICANN is supposed to be open to all stakeholders,
> but in fact it hasn't been open to any end-users, either of domain
> names or of IP addresses. The former have been consistently and
> categorically excluded from the DNSO, and the latter have no direct
> representation in the ASO. That is the objective reality. Saying
> that they are included doesn't make it so.

Yes, that's my concern too.  This is watered down representation and not
the bottom up control I'm looking for.  One thing the IPv4 owners may want
to consider is should the regional registries exist at all.  They have
served a purpose, but is that service better administered by a more
independent administration.  An administration controled directly by
majority vote of the IPv4 holders.

This is a major concern to me - that I do not have the ability to make
these choices, nor that a concerted effort has been made toward informing
the IPv4 owners on what is going on with the RIR's, the ASO and ICANN.

Regards
Joe Baptista

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html