Re: [ga] [centr-legal] Domain Council at .AT - facts

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Michael and all assembly members,

Michael Haberler wrote:

> AAt 04:12 27.07.2001 +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> >"But are the VIBE people really representative of the
> >Austrian Internet user community?" It's undeniable that
> >it's harder to forge an user association than a group
> >of registrar companies -- but that's not a valid excuse
> >to exclude individual user interests, and I appreciate
> >that it has been attempted here.
>
> Well, this is the situation.
>
> vibe.at has a track record of intelligent initiatives beyond provider
> bashing, and they are willing to take up community projects (read: do
> actual work).  Another 'user asscociation' would have been the UPC (cable
> Internet) user group which is mainly concerned with flaming their provider.
> Beyond that, there's silence.
>
> The classical Austrian approach would have been to use the 'Sozialpartners'
> which tends to include unions, chamber of commerce, agricultural
> cooperatives and other groups of interest.
>
> There is quite often a goal conflict between 'democratically legitimated'
> and 'expert' advise, and we have chosen the latter one.

  Yes this is an important point.  There is often multiple conflicts of
interests between 'democratically legitimated' and so called or self
defined 'Expert Advisory' groups for providing advice.  Many times
these two groups have opposing schools of thought and as a result
conflict arises.  I personally prefer a combination of the two different
groups, which is what our group, INEGroup consists of..  In this way
you have a diverse yet well qualified body of individuals that can
hash out conflicting points of interest and view in a rational and
inclusive manner.

> If anybody is
> unsure wether this is justified, just check the recent opinion of an
> European Parliament comittee on e-mail spam.
>
> At this stage, where we're doing the step from zero to one, it is a largely
> utopic wish to have a democratically represented local Internet community
> anyway, and I am not sure if democratic legitimation is the higher goal
> than quality of advice and professionalism.

  To a point agreed.  However professionalism is defined in various ways
by various groups and individuals.  Processionals such as yourself or myself
may have strong disagreements on the direction a particular technology
should or could take.

> The DNS is not a random policy
> issue like some agricultural subsidy, it is at the core of the Internet
> operation, and it would not be prudent to have clueless folk fiddle with
> it. I would assume that legitimation would over time come from the way on
> how issues are discussed and dealt with within the community.

  DNS is not a policy at all.  It is the Domain Naming System.  As such
it is a set of protocols and various other software that provide for a specific

set of task for locating a Domain Name on a network or networks of
interconnected servers.  However there are some concerns on how the
DNS can or should be able to be used and issues dealing with privacy
and content that are of some political and policy concern.  These issues
although not technically directly related, are serious issues that need
the assistance of policy people to assist in finding a set of policies
that can be broadly excepted by the stakeholders, and that these
same stakeholders have a voice and vote in their potential acceptance
and implementation.

> It is clear
> that there has to be a wider consultation process on issues of far-reaching
> consequences, and the consituencies of the groups from which the council
> members come are an important fan-out mechanism here.

  Indeed!  (See my comments just above)

>
>
> There is a very good reason why telecom operators have a 'harm to the
> network' clause in their contracts, which allows them to unplug customers
> which do damage to the net. Expert advice is our form of 'harm to the
> network' protection.

  Yes.  However "Harm to the Network" is a very loose phrase or
definition of a situation that is not well defined specifically.

>
>
> -Michael Haberler
>
> ps: My point of view on .EU is quite similar.
>
> > > Judge yourself where you find a 'co-regulatory approach' here.
> >
> >I admit that I took that phrase from the Heise.de article
> >and found it a bit harsh (even though there is quite a
> >difference between the Austrian model and the GAC -- the
> >Austrian Domain Name Council decisions seem to be binding
> >if not completely nonsensical).
> >
> >Best regards,
> >/// Alexander
>
> ----
> Michael Haberler                       mah@eunet.at
> Mariahilferstrasse 126/27         Tel +43 1 5261679
> A-1070 Vienna Austria           Fax +43 1 526167925
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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