Re: [ga] rolling up the sleeves.

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 10:15 21/09/01, Jeff Williams said:
> > I am especially interested to hear comment on the funding idea's presented
> > there (a fourth level nnn.members.icann.org domain name for all members of
> > this constituency as real value for the proposed $12 membership fee.)
>
>   I think you are going to have trouble for funding something called an
>"Individuals Constituency" when it does not represent any and all
>potential Individuals or stakeholders...

Dear Joop, Jeff,
in this particular case Joop's proposition seems odd. To be a registered DN 
holder (while you may not have a DN by your own, but just control one by 
someone else) you would have to become a real holder of another DN.

Now the problem is general. Internet governance (what make the network 
consensus organized) has three levels we see very well in here: participant 
individual (individual domain names holders, @large, developers at IEFT, 
etc...), participant constituencies (here the IDNHC) and governance centers 
(here the ICANN) where constituency delegate representatives. So the basic 
problem is the PIN: to ubniquely identify the individuals in the cheapest 
and most secure way.

IMHO The ALSC's and Joop's way to use DNs is not appropriate because most 
of the collected money goes to other purposes and because the DN solution 
itself is not credible enough. DN have to be reformed to identify the DN 
holders and his rights: what makes this to loop.

I see three main problems. One is to identify the participant as unique. 
The second is to make sure he can confortably vote (receive his PIN, be 
able to vote, etc... without problem nor extra cost). The third one is 
secrecy of the vote (when you vote in real world no one can trace your vote 
to you as votes and ID records are kept separated, while in e-votes keep 
the vote and the identification together for checking - in real you recount 
votes, in e-votes you recount voters).

At IALNA boot strap (Internet At Large Network Association I announced at 
Montevideo GA meeting) we have that problems. We have a cheap solution in 
mind calling for a very small program we are developing right now. We will 
deploy and test it (we think it may cost us around $ 200 a month + R&D and 
control). Then we will need to partner with an existing industry sharing 
the same need for good local coverage. I expect we could be ready by Feb or 
March 2002 (I explained we want to be fully operational for the 2002 @large 
election). I will report on it.

Any comment and suggestion welcome as this is a very general problem.
Jefsey







--
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