[ga] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Fwd: CPSR/CIVSOC STATEMENT ON THE ICANN AT LARGE MEMBERSHIP

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

Todd and all,

todd glassey wrote:

> I think that the intent of the 1998 Agreement is one of the key problems
> with today's Internet.

  I think that in some ways this statement is very accurate here Todd.
But I believe and almost all of our [INEGroup] members believe is
that it is a matter of cross interpretations of the White Paper in particular
and the MoU to a lesser extent.

> It paints the Internet as a public conveyance that
> everyone just sort of uses...

  I don't see this to be so at all...

> It also doesn't do much to define the methods
> of which are used to pay for this technology and its deployment or more
> importantly how this "global 1998 Internet model" will allow each and every
> Jurisdictional Area to constrain its piece of the "Internet" with its own
> operating rules and law.

  The private sector must do the paying.  It always has to some degree.
The difference now ti that it must pay for all of it.  However sense
Accra, Stuart Lynn's proposal would seem to wish to change that
to the governments putting up par to the $$ if not the majority
of the $$.

>
>
> In fact the 1998 agreement is more a One-World fantasy that is maybe more
> about what it would have looked like if the ARPANET was made public and
> extended to every point on the globe, than what the Internet is all about.

  The Internet is and extension of ARPANET.  It is supposed to be.
So no fantasy involved that I can see.  Rather an evolution that
has taken place, and continues.

>
>
> One of the things that is occurring now is that Countries are realizing that
> they cannot let IEC/LEC Carriers in general run willy-nilly any which way
> they want; and that to implement eBorders (a task thankfully much easier
> than closing the physical borders to unauthorized traffic) that simple and
> reasonable rules have to be put in place defining how the Carriers
> interrelate their networks to one another.

  Exactly and a good general point.  In the US this would mean the
FCC regulations come into serious play here.  However none of
this deals with the DNS directly but has an indirect effect upon
the DNS in a number of obvious ways, and of course in some
not so obvious ways.

>
>
> Finally the biggest shortcoming of the 1998 accord is that it  mistakenly
> assumes that the Internet is one homogeneous community and that one DNS root
> and one set of rules will work for all. [insert obnoxious BUZZER sound
> effect here if you like]

  Also a good point.  One that has been made many many times before,
and long before you were participating...

>
>
> What could they have been smoking at the time? Dust from Xerox's Dynabook
> project some 20 years prior...
>
> Todd Glassey
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hans Klein" <hans.klein@pubpolicy.gatech.edu>
> To: <bwg-n-friends@jetty.net>; <discuss@icann-ncc.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:49 PM
> Subject: [ncdnhc-discuss] Fwd: CPSR/CIVSOC STATEMENT ON THE ICANN AT LARGE
> MEMBERSHIP
>
> >
> > >Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:47:02 -0400
> > >To: civsoc@cpsr.org
> > >From: civsoc@cpsr.org
> > >Subject: CPSR/CIVSOC STATEMENT ON THE ICANN AT LARGE MEMBERSHIP
> > >
> > >
> > >CPSR/CIVSOC STATEMENT ON THE ICANN AT LARGE MEMBERSHIP
> > >
> > >27 July 2002
> > >
> > >Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) participates in
> > >the ICANN process via the CPSR Civil Society Democracy Project
> > >(www.CivSoc.org).  CPSR/CivSoc offers the following statement about its
> > >activities that relate to the At Large Membership.
> > >
> > >CPSR/CivSoc is participating in the At Large Organizing Committee (ALOC),
> > >led by Denise Michel and with active participation of Esther Dyson and
> > >other individuals.   (See www.at-large.org).  To avoid any confusion that
> > >this participation might create, we wish to clarify our views on the
> > >status and substantive recommendations of the ALOC.
> > >
> > >User representation on the ICANN board was the cornerstone of DNS
> > >privatization in 1998, and to the extent that the ALOC's activities
> > >contribute to the implementation of this, then CPSR/CivSoc supports those
> > >activities. All efforts to implement user representation in ICANN -- be
> > >they from the ALOC, the Interim Coordinating Committee
> > >(www.ICANNmembers.org), the NAIS, or the ALSC - are to be commended.
> > >
> > >We hasten to point out that the ALOC possesses no special status to
> > >represent the user in ICANN processes.  The ALOC is one voice in the
> > >on-going effort to implement user representation in ICANN.  Its claim to
> > >represent 500,000 users is, in our opinion, not convincing (the numbers
> > >derive from one organization's claims of user representation:
> > >www.cecua.org.)  Furthermore, the fact that many of the ALOC's
> > >participants have little history of participation in ICANN activities
> > >lessens its credibility.  Nonetheless, every effort, regardless of its
> > >limitations, in support of user representation in ICANN is important and
> > >useful.
> > >
> > >CPSR/CivSoc does not support any activities or positions of the ALOC that
> > >are contrary to the terms of Internet privatization.  CPSR/CivSoc does
> not
> > >support relegating users to an "advisory" role, doing away with direct
> > >elections, or abandoning the principle of balanced representation between
> > >users and industry experts.  We note that many - and, by our tally,
> most -
> > >members of ALOC support direct elections of user representatives to the
> > >ICANN board.
> > >
> > >ICANN can best gain legitimacy by implementing the terms of the 1998
> > >privatization agreement.  User representation on the board and direct
> > >elections are essential aspects of that.  CPSR/CivSoc's participation in
> > >ALOC and other user-related activities are done in order to achieve
> > >implementation of those agreements.
> > >
> > >###
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss@icann-ncc.org
> > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders 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:  972-244-3801 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