Re: [ga] Re: Timetable and proceedure for vote

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

I have some more wording changes.

See inline below.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Steinberg" <synthesis@videotron.ca>
To: "Darrell Greenwood" <lists1@mac.com>
Cc: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@does-not-exist.org>; "James Love"
<james.love@cptech.org>; "General assembly list" <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Timetable and proceedure for vote


> After mulling it over in my mind for a few days....I suggest the
> slightly modified text as follows:
>
> The GA  sends a mandate too the US Department of Commerce and to the US
Federal Trade Commission

to  setup and require for perpetude,

> an open
> competition for the services now provided by ICANN

ASO's. This new competition would address the need to develop both a US
specific and an international framework for DNS management.  The rationale
for mandating this rebid is that ICANN has dramatically changed the intitial
terms of refence for its own and the overall operaitons of the name space,
and is at this time proposing even further changes. These proposed changes

> have met extensive opposition in the Internet community and go even
> further from the original terms of reference. The rebid would allow the

DoC and the US Federal trade Commission to compell the ICANN board to
address the critical initiatiaves and evolutionary requirements for
restructuring; the alternatives offered by others for managing key Internet
resources; and provide for increased scrutiny in the form of a public record
as a part of the ongoing ICANN process audit.


TTFN
Todd

>
>
>
> Darrell Greenwood wrote:
> >
> > On 5/8/02 at 10:36 AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote :
> >
> > >On 2002-05-08 04:25:49 -0400, James Love wrote:
> > >
> > >>"The GA asks the the US Department of Commerce to have an open
> > >>competition for the services now provided by ICANN, provided that
> > >>the new competition would address the need to develop an
> > >>international framework for DNS management.  The rationale for
> > >>asking for a rebid is that ICANN has dramatically changed the
> > >>intitial terms of refence for ICANN, and is proposing even further
> > >>changes, which have met extensive opposition in the Internet
> > >>community. The rebid would allow the DoC to consider both the
> > >>ICANN board proposal for restructuring, and alternatives offered
> > >>by others for managing key Internet resources."
> >
> > I support this text.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Darrell
> > --
> > 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
> --
> 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
>
>

--
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