<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Joe Sims
I have informed you recently of the Registrants Constituency preparation
efforts started at European initiatives. The visit of Joe Sims and other
elements confirm that EEC, European Industry and Participants are accepted
as a serious possible threat to the Majors' (ATT/IBM/SAIC/MS) attempts to
take over the naming plan, as enlighted by former IBM Stuart Lynn's ICP-3
document, supported by IAB ATT engineers, enacted by Verisign a partner of
MS in Realnames, surprisingly added to the Accra Agenda. Why no Berkman
institute in Accra: not to show the reason why Marilyn Cade opposes so
vehemently New.net or/and the closing of the GA?
In this stary the GA, the ALSC, the IDNO, the gTLD mailing lists are
important focal points where all of us may consider the best common
interest of the Internet Participants and show the BoD where reality lies.
IMHO Joe Sims fails to understand the very architecture of the network and
of the XXIth century society. They want it legally centralised with GAC
Members being the ICANN "cops" to impose his contracting strategy to the
TLD Managers. The nets are not centralized and directed, they are not even
meshed and managed as the NIC+GAC could propose: they are distributed and
consensually simultaneously used and provided. They are not a block to
carve with a few names, they are not stones to build with, they are just
sand flowing around blocking points of failure.
What ATT/IBM/SAIC/MS are proposing may look nice, may look sensible but it
so conceptually outdated than it will not survive. While it survives and
develops, it will block network innovation by the largest number. It will
create permanent operation unrest, unstability and lack of security until
the day it collapses under the market tide, probably at great cost, as a
faded technology.
If we could organize as structured @large : industries, business, content
providers, registrants, users, IP owners, in a smooth organization, just
liberalizing and opening the ICANN existing structure we could cut a common
Internet Participant deal in the best interest of everyone.
Otherwise it will be a competition unfortunately understood by most around
the world as "US vs the rest of the world" because the leading opponents to
people privacy, independance, free naming, technical autonomy happens to be
seated both in the USA and in their lack of vision.
As a European, as a partner with American, Chinese, Japanese, Australian,
Brazilean, African, Indian, Pacific, French and European developpers, I do
not want to be engaged in a so stupid fight into such a waste of energies,
into such an uncessary dispute of magnitude.
Even if we - all of us except the dinosaurs - will obviously win at the end
of the day.
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|