Re: [ga] GA position on Verisign contract

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

This is why there is no other solution than:
-  iCANN incorporating as the association of the national NICs (ccTLD, IP 
addressing, local/private TLD managing facilities, internet community 
services, etc...) and gTLDs at a lower degree.
- that association requesting the UN NGO status.

I note that the USG legitimacy (as per Hans Klein at least) over the 
Internet comes from two points:
-  the IP addressing scheme the international and social complexity and 
technical correlations of which are such that it is definitly an issue for 
the ITU/T
-  a missing (?) loop in the current BIND version that anyone may add, so 
the root may be loaded as several root-file subsets. Once these may 10 
lines of code aree added the unicity of the root is preserved but the 
multiplicity of its origines is built-in. The role of the iCANN is then to 
make sure (according to its equal treatment to all charter) that all the 
subsets are presented in a proper format and there is no TLD naming 
conflicts. All the current work with UDRP, Registrars and new TLD is QA by 
a proheminent body: proposing solutions, control, label for the market to 
better chose and be served.

In a nutshell, iCANN is not to "protect" us, but to serve us.
Jefsey

On 09:43 29/03/01, Eric Dierker said:
>Bill, May I call you that?
>
>For some reason you miss the correlation between public input and what the 
>government
>can do.  I don't know why but for some reason I thought you were a 
>moderately mature
>American who had understood this concept.
>
>I apologize for any assumption.  For anyone lost in this concept let me 
>make it
>perfectly clear; when we speak of the ability or legality of US gov. 
>action it directly
>relates to the open and obvious participation of the public, without that 
>participation
>it is considered notorious and illegitimate.
>
>ICANN fortunate or not under the APA must follow the same rules.  And if 
>they do not,
>all of their actions are subject to revocation and or a finding of 
>illegitimacy
>
>"William X. Walsh" wrote:
>
> > No one is talking about what the government can legally do and what it 
> can't
> > legally do, Eric.
> >
> > We are talking about whether it is appropriate or inappropriate for
> > ICANN to do or consider doing.
> >
>
>Oh most definately we are good sir.
>
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >  William                            mailto:william@userfriendly.com
>
>--
>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