RE: [ga] The Real World

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

Dear all

 

As is well known, I am one of the representatives of the business constituency,  I also work 

within a company who is a major stakeholder in the Internet, wearing the hat of an ISP,

a business user, a web hoster, a famous ;' and well known brand holder, and acting as an

intermediary for several thousand businesses who have build web sites on the Internet.

 

This post is as an individual:  BUT, I am the rapporteur in the BC on this issue and I believe that

business users are fully committed to the Evolution and Reform Process which ICANN announced.

 

Did we agree with all the initial solutions proposed?    No.

Did we agree with the list of issues to be addressed.Yes, largely.

Are we willing and committed to evolution?  YES.

Are we committed to ICANN's success? YES.

 

It is easy to throw stones. Better, harder, and more important to work to be part of a

process to ensure private sector  leadership in the issues and responsibilities ICANN manages.

 

I believe that you could say that the business users have taken sides as well. That is the side of

evolving, improving and stabilizing ICANN.

 

Recently,  a multi lateral organization has raised its hand and said something like: what about me?

I can do it better.Or cheaper. Or more like governments like it...  I have seen many postings from

industry sectors who object to any efforts by governments or multi lateral organizations to encroach

into the Internet via attempting to assume some of ICANN's functions.

 

Industry says, no. Thank you, but no. We will continue to evolve ICANN and

welcome the support of governments [or multilateral organizations/treaty organizations]

to private sector leadership.  We urge governments to work to support ICANN; to participate

in GAC. To lend support to ICANN's activities. NOT to compete, and not to seek to

take on functions which belong to ICANN.

 

On Evolution and Reform:

 

Will this be easy? No

Will it continue to be a bit noisy? Yes.

It is perfect? No....

Will everyone be satisfied?Not likely.

Is it worth it? Yes

 

Regards,

 

Marilyn Cade

Posting as an individual business constituency member and elected representative, on my own personal views

-----Original Message-----
From: William S. Lovell [mailto:wsl@cerebalaw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:15 PM
To: ga@DNSO.org
Subject: [ga] The Real World

The following should be of more than passing interest:

"The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN) was set up in 1998 to oversee several important
functions that keep the Internet running. Ever since, it has been
 criticized for lack of accountability and openness.  In February,
 its current President, M Stuart Lynn, issued a manifesto
claiming that ICANN was seriously broken and proposing a
complete reform.  Although many concede that ICANN has
failed, few agree with Lynn's specific proposals, which
essentially call for a rebuilt organization with three to five
times the budget, more than 50 percent additional staff
and greater power.  Critics argue that this plan will create
a single point of failure, the very thing the Internet's design
sought to avoid.

The upshot has been to reopen the intense debates that
preceded ICANN's formation. Even former pacifists,
including Peter G. Neumann, who moderates the online
bulletin board RISKS Forum, and Lauren Weinstein of
People for Internet Responsibility, are taking sides.  They
say that an immediate handover to a less political, more
strictly technical organization, such as the Internet
Architecture Board, is necessary to avoid a meltdown."

"Need to Know: ICANN CAN'T," Scientific American,
June 2002, p. 21.

Bill Lovell